Think people are missing the point here. Putin is an odious pimp but he's the only man on the planet that can stop IS with impunity to political fallout. It's why Obama and the other western leaders have suddenly changed their tack on Assad. Opening the door for Russia to help their Middle Eastern ally, stop IS into the bargain and solve the west's inability to do what is required for fear of political backlash. He's not doing it to protect us but it's a very satisfying spinoff.
But at what price?
And who pays that price? The Free Syrian?
Or the Kurds who've been defeating ISIS on the ground?
Yes it is realpolitik but it still doesn't sit well.
Totally agree. It's always the innocent that suffer. The Kurds will be collateral damage in crushing IS and propping up the tyrant Assad. The west will tut tut but are complicit in clearing the way for Putin to take action.
And you think Putin won't extract a price from the West for this, if he succeeds?
The current Russian State is the most threatening on the planet to Western values. It has resources which dwarf those of ISIS or other terrorist groups.
Read Bill Browder, Edward Lucas, Luke Harding. etc, etc. And remember Alexander Litvinenko. Murdered in London, in a barbaric manner which put thousands of Londoners at risk.
Muslim extremists murdered and maimed scores of Londoners 10 years ago. And Muslim extremists still poise a massive and growing threat to Londoners.
By comparison I would say Russia poises zero threat to my life and my values. I don't see much difference between Western and Russian values. Especially when compared to the values of ISIS or indeed any Muslim country.
Well when I said "Western values" I was kind of thinking of more than one individual British citizen. But never mind. I'd just ask you to bear in mind that Russia is not a democracy, never has been, and is a nuclear power with huge resources at its disposal. And it has a chip on its shoulder. It's that chip on its shoulder that is driving the activity that this thread discusses.
I was trying to respond to your point about Russia being a threat to Londoners. I, as a Londoner (and I think I can speak for many Londoners) feel no threat whatsoever from Russia.
Yes, Russia is not and has never been a democracy. But I would say we in the west still share many values with the people and government of Russia.
It's easy to be sanguine about Russia's intentions when you're sitting in London. If you live in Eastern Europe your perspective would be rather different. Europe has showed itself to be divided and weak which won't have been lost on the Russians.
Think people are missing the point here. Putin is an odious pimp but he's the only man on the planet that can stop IS with impunity to political fallout. It's why Obama and the other western leaders have suddenly changed their tack on Assad. Opening the door for Russia to help their Middle Eastern ally, stop IS into the bargain and solve the west's inability to do what is required for fear of political backlash. He's not doing it to protect us but it's a very satisfying spinoff.
We need to be in talks with Putin and the Turks. Unfortunate, but that's what it has come down to. Defeat IS at all costs before addressing anything else. The clock is ticking.
Think people are missing the point here. Putin is an odious pimp but he's the only man on the planet that can stop IS with impunity to political fallout. It's why Obama and the other western leaders have suddenly changed their tack on Assad. Opening the door for Russia to help their Middle Eastern ally, stop IS into the bargain and solve the west's inability to do what is required for fear of political backlash. He's not doing it to protect us but it's a very satisfying spinoff.
But at what price?
And who pays that price? The Free Syrian?
Or the Kurds who've been defeating ISIS on the ground?
Yes it is realpolitik but it still doesn't sit well.
Totally agree. It's always the innocent that suffer. The Kurds will be collateral damage in crushing IS and propping up the tyrant Assad. The west will tut tut but are complicit in clearing the way for Putin to take action.
And you think Putin won't extract a price from the West for this, if he succeeds?
The current Russian State is the most threatening on the planet to Western values. It has resources which dwarf those of ISIS or other terrorist groups.
Read Bill Browder, Edward Lucas, Luke Harding. etc, etc. And remember Alexander Litvinenko. Murdered in London, in a barbaric manner which put thousands of Londoners at risk.
Muslim extremists murdered and maimed scores of Londoners 10 years ago. And Muslim extremists still poise a massive and growing threat to Londoners.
By comparison I would say Russia poises zero threat to my life and my values. I don't see much difference between Western and Russian values. Especially when compared to the values of ISIS or indeed any Muslim country.
Well when I said "Western values" I was kind of thinking of more than one individual British citizen. But never mind. I'd just ask you to bear in mind that Russia is not a democracy, never has been, and is a nuclear power with huge resources at its disposal. And it has a chip on its shoulder. It's that chip on its shoulder that is driving the activity that this thread discusses.
I was trying to respond to your point about Russia being a threat to Londoners. I, as a Londoner (and I think I can speak for many Londoners) feel no threat whatsoever from Russia.
Yes, Russia is not and has never been a democracy. But I would say we in the west still share many values with the people and government of Russia.
It's easy to be sanguine about Russia's intentions when you're sitting in London. If you live in Eastern Europe your perspective would be rather different. Europe has showed itself to be divided and weak which won't have been lost on the Russians.
I think he was responding to a comment about Russia being a threat to Londoners so makes quite a lot of sense to write from the perspective of someone "sitting in London".
Why is it too politically hot for the west to do anything about IS? (Not being facetious, I really don't know my politics!)
Afghan and Iraq have taken their toll on the West's "appetite" to invade other countries.
UK and US are bombing ISIS positions, further action would likely require land invasion.
Land invasion brings with it the very likely prospect of ISIS kidnapping a Western soldier and beheading that soldier on video to be shared across social media.
Western armies have always struggled against guerrilla forces. Anything less than wiping out ISIS would be seen as "defeat".
That's just a starter for why the West doesn't want to intervene.
I reiterate that I am not scared of ISIS. I am not calling for a Western invasion, nor do I need Putin to protect me.
Think people are missing the point here. Putin is an odious pimp but he's the only man on the planet that can stop IS with impunity to political fallout. It's why Obama and the other western leaders have suddenly changed their tack on Assad. Opening the door for Russia to help their Middle Eastern ally, stop IS into the bargain and solve the west's inability to do what is required for fear of political backlash. He's not doing it to protect us but it's a very satisfying spinoff.
But at what price?
And who pays that price? The Free Syrian?
Or the Kurds who've been defeating ISIS on the ground?
Yes it is realpolitik but it still doesn't sit well.
Totally agree. It's always the innocent that suffer. The Kurds will be collateral damage in crushing IS and propping up the tyrant Assad. The west will tut tut but are complicit in clearing the way for Putin to take action.
And you think Putin won't extract a price from the West for this, if he succeeds?
The current Russian State is the most threatening on the planet to Western values. It has resources which dwarf those of ISIS or other terrorist groups.
Read Bill Browder, Edward Lucas, Luke Harding. etc, etc. And remember Alexander Litvinenko. Murdered in London, in a barbaric manner which put thousands of Londoners at risk.
Muslim extremists murdered and maimed scores of Londoners 10 years ago. And Muslim extremists still poise a massive and growing threat to Londoners.
By comparison I would say Russia poises zero threat to my life and my values. I don't see much difference between Western and Russian values. Especially when compared to the values of ISIS or indeed any Muslim country.
Well when I said "Western values" I was kind of thinking of more than one individual British citizen. But never mind. I'd just ask you to bear in mind that Russia is not a democracy, never has been, and is a nuclear power with huge resources at its disposal. And it has a chip on its shoulder. It's that chip on its shoulder that is driving the activity that this thread discusses.
I was trying to respond to your point about Russia being a threat to Londoners. I, as a Londoner (and I think I can speak for many Londoners) feel no threat whatsoever from Russia.
Yes, Russia is not and has never been a democracy. But I would say we in the west still share many values with the people and government of Russia.
It's easy to be sanguine about Russia's intentions when you're sitting in London. If you live in Eastern Europe your perspective would be rather different. Europe has showed itself to be divided and weak which won't have been lost on the Russians.
I was on the tube today. I was also on a bus that came through Tavistock Square. I know who and what is the main threat to my city. And it is not Russia.
Think people are missing the point here. Putin is an odious pimp but he's the only man on the planet that can stop IS with impunity to political fallout. It's why Obama and the other western leaders have suddenly changed their tack on Assad. Opening the door for Russia to help their Middle Eastern ally, stop IS into the bargain and solve the west's inability to do what is required for fear of political backlash. He's not doing it to protect us but it's a very satisfying spinoff.
But at what price?
And who pays that price? The Free Syrian?
Or the Kurds who've been defeating ISIS on the ground?
Yes it is realpolitik but it still doesn't sit well.
Totally agree. It's always the innocent that suffer. The Kurds will be collateral damage in crushing IS and propping up the tyrant Assad. The west will tut tut but are complicit in clearing the way for Putin to take action.
And you think Putin won't extract a price from the West for this, if he succeeds?
The current Russian State is the most threatening on the planet to Western values. It has resources which dwarf those of ISIS or other terrorist groups.
Read Bill Browder, Edward Lucas, Luke Harding. etc, etc. And remember Alexander Litvinenko. Murdered in London, in a barbaric manner which put thousands of Londoners at risk.
Muslim extremists murdered and maimed scores of Londoners 10 years ago. And Muslim extremists still poise a massive and growing threat to Londoners.
By comparison I would say Russia poises zero threat to my life and my values. I don't see much difference between Western and Russian values. Especially when compared to the values of ISIS or indeed any Muslim country.
Well when I said "Western values" I was kind of thinking of more than one individual British citizen. But never mind. I'd just ask you to bear in mind that Russia is not a democracy, never has been, and is a nuclear power with huge resources at its disposal. And it has a chip on its shoulder. It's that chip on its shoulder that is driving the activity that this thread discusses.
I was trying to respond to your point about Russia being a threat to Londoners. I, as a Londoner (and I think I can speak for many Londoners) feel no threat whatsoever from Russia.
Yes, Russia is not and has never been a democracy. But I would say we in the west still share many values with the people and government of Russia.
It's easy to be sanguine about Russia's intentions when you're sitting in London. If you live in Eastern Europe your perspective would be rather different. Europe has showed itself to be divided and weak which won't have been lost on the Russians.
I think he was responding to a comment about Russia being a threat to Londoners so makes quite a lot of sense to write from the perspective of someone "sitting in London".
The original post was from someone sitting a lot closer to the Russian border than we are which I thought was an interesting perspective. However you want to define western civilisation I think we can all agree it extends past the M25.
I think the dilemma is that to attack ISIS we have to support Assad who is an undisputed tyrant, user of chemical weapons against civilians and war criminal. Putin has no problem with that as he is (reputedly) a Russian mafia henchman. We are now defending the current regime against rebels who we previously armed in order to overthrow him (Assad).
No wonder Corbyn is reluctant to commit to short term military action, although perhaps he will get cosy with Putin sometime.
Think people are missing the point here. Putin is an odious pimp but he's the only man on the planet that can stop IS with impunity to political fallout. It's why Obama and the other western leaders have suddenly changed their tack on Assad. Opening the door for Russia to help their Middle Eastern ally, stop IS into the bargain and solve the west's inability to do what is required for fear of political backlash. He's not doing it to protect us but it's a very satisfying spinoff.
But at what price?
And who pays that price? The Free Syrian?
Or the Kurds who've been defeating ISIS on the ground?
Yes it is realpolitik but it still doesn't sit well.
Totally agree. It's always the innocent that suffer. The Kurds will be collateral damage in crushing IS and propping up the tyrant Assad. The west will tut tut but are complicit in clearing the way for Putin to take action.
And you think Putin won't extract a price from the West for this, if he succeeds?
The current Russian State is the most threatening on the planet to Western values. It has resources which dwarf those of ISIS or other terrorist groups.
Read Bill Browder, Edward Lucas, Luke Harding. etc, etc. And remember Alexander Litvinenko. Murdered in London, in a barbaric manner which put thousands of Londoners at risk.
Muslim extremists murdered and maimed scores of Londoners 10 years ago. And Muslim extremists still poise a massive and growing threat to Londoners.
By comparison I would say Russia poises zero threat to my life and my values. I don't see much difference between Western and Russian values. Especially when compared to the values of ISIS or indeed any Muslim country.
Well when I said "Western values" I was kind of thinking of more than one individual British citizen. But never mind. I'd just ask you to bear in mind that Russia is not a democracy, never has been, and is a nuclear power with huge resources at its disposal. And it has a chip on its shoulder. It's that chip on its shoulder that is driving the activity that this thread discusses.
I was trying to respond to your point about Russia being a threat to Londoners. I, as a Londoner (and I think I can speak for many Londoners) feel no threat whatsoever from Russia.
Yes, Russia is not and has never been a democracy. But I would say we in the west still share many values with the people and government of Russia.
It's easy to be sanguine about Russia's intentions when you're sitting in London. If you live in Eastern Europe your perspective would be rather different. Europe has showed itself to be divided and weak which won't have been lost on the Russians.
I was on the tube today. I was also on a bus that came through Tavistock Square. I know who and what is the main threat to my city. And it is not Russia.
You are extremely lucky then that you were not in the immediate area when two Russian thugs, one of whom is now in Parliament and has his own TV show, were preparing their Polonium 210 dose for the purpose of murdering a British citizen, in London. It may not seem dramatic compared with 7/7, but the difference is that it was planned, premeditated, by a head of state. A state which bristles with the largest stockpile of lethal weapons outside the US, and which is pumping its citizens full of vile anti-Western propaganda on a daily basis. You can see and read some of that for yourself, if you check the comments column below any Guardian article which seems vaguely critical of Russia.
Anyone who sees this Russian move as simply a decisive move against terrorists, because Russia shares our fear and loathing of their values is hopelessly naive. If you don't fancy reading any books then at least you can follow the spoof Vladimir Putin on Twitter. It is of course a cynical caricature, but it is also a portrayal of the real Russian mindset.
Finally I did not wish the phrase "hopelessly naive" to be taken as a personal criticism of anyone here. Round about 1991 that would describe exactly my attitude to Russia. You might even add "romantically" . I've had the mother of all lessons in the succeeding years. I don't expect everyone to see what I'm on about, but I have to try. Not least on behalf of the people nearest and dearest in this place I now call home. ( a place described by Neville Chamberlain, a cowardly appeaser who disgraced the name of Great Britain, as "a faraway country of which we know little")
Why is it too politically hot for the west to do anything about IS? (Not being facetious, I really don't know my politics!)
I reiterate that I am not scared of ISIS. I am not calling for a Western invasion, nor do I need Putin to protect me.
You come across as being very tough. No doubt a front and a mask to portray yourself as something you wish you could be.
I don't think your pants filling ability would be up for debate if you were confronted with a religious fanatic that wouldn't think twice about cutting your brave little head off.
It's easy to espouse a certain position when not confronted with the true realities you'd face if in their company.
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
Why is it too politically hot for the west to do anything about IS? (Not being facetious, I really don't know my politics!)
I reiterate that I am not scared of ISIS. I am not calling for a Western invasion, nor do I need Putin to protect me.
You come across as being very tough. No doubt a front and a mask to portray yourself as something you wish you could be.
I don't think your pants filling ability would be up for debate if you were confronted with a religious fanatic that wouldn't think twice about cutting your brave little head off.
It's easy to espouse a certain position when not confronted with the true realities you'd face if in their company.
I'm not trying to pretend that I wouldn't be scared of them if I lived in Syria. I'm also not trying to pretend that I would go to Syria any time soon.
There's no doubt about it. If confronted by them, they would probably kill me, in whatever fashion they liked. But the same is true of various terrorists and groups around the world. I'm not scared of ISIS because they're thousands of miles away and they show no indication of having the organisation capabilities to establish a state to threaten any Western state. They're good at internet marketing, which is why so many people are afraid of them.
I am not willing to trade/sacrifice Syrian lives for protection from ISIS, and not care if Assad wipes out entire towns and regions with Putin's help. ISIS are not a sufficient threat to me. Other people are willing to make that trade, I ask them not to include me in their "we".
ISIS are not the same thing as Islamic extremism. Wiping them out of Syria won't wipe out Islamic extremism where it exists within the UK. If anything, it would have the opposite effect.
*edit to change wording. I do care if Assad wipes out Syrian towns and regions
Why is it too politically hot for the west to do anything about IS? (Not being facetious, I really don't know my politics!)
I reiterate that I am not scared of ISIS. I am not calling for a Western invasion, nor do I need Putin to protect me.
You come across as being very tough. No doubt a front and a mask to portray yourself as something you wish you could be.
I don't think your pants filling ability would be up for debate if you were confronted with a religious fanatic that wouldn't think twice about cutting your brave little head off.
It's easy to espouse a certain position when not confronted with the true realities you'd face if in their company.
I'm not trying to pretend that I wouldn't be scared of them if I lived in Syria. I'm also not trying to pretend that I would go to Syria any time soon.
There's no doubt about it. If confronted by them, they would probably kill me, in whatever fashion they liked. But the same is true of various terrorists and groups around the world. I'm not scared of ISIS because they're thousands of miles away and they show no indication of having the organisation capabilities to establish a state to threaten any Western state. They're good at internet marketing, which is why so many people are afraid of them.
I am not willing to trade/sacrifice Syrian lives for protection from ISIS, and don't care if Assad wipes out entire towns and regions with Putin's help. ISIS are not a sufficient threat to me. Other people are willing to make that trade, I ask them not to include me in their "we".
ISIS are not the same thing as Islamic extremism. Wiping them out of Syria won't wipe out Islamic extremism where it exists within the UK. If anything, it would have the opposite effect.
The 'indication of having the organisation capabilities to establish a state to threaten any Western state' is irrelevant as that isn't their aim. They're quite happy to infiltrate and carry out sporadic acts of extreme violence/terror on those that allow them to do so by not confronting them.
Why is it too politically hot for the west to do anything about IS? (Not being facetious, I really don't know my politics!)
I reiterate that I am not scared of ISIS. I am not calling for a Western invasion, nor do I need Putin to protect me.
You come across as being very tough. No doubt a front and a mask to portray yourself as something you wish you could be.
I don't think your pants filling ability would be up for debate if you were confronted with a religious fanatic that wouldn't think twice about cutting your brave little head off.
It's easy to espouse a certain position when not confronted with the true realities you'd face if in their company.
I'm not trying to pretend that I wouldn't be scared of them if I lived in Syria. I'm also not trying to pretend that I would go to Syria any time soon.
There's no doubt about it. If confronted by them, they would probably kill me, in whatever fashion they liked. But the same is true of various terrorists and groups around the world. I'm not scared of ISIS because they're thousands of miles away and they show no indication of having the organisation capabilities to establish a state to threaten any Western state. They're good at internet marketing, which is why so many people are afraid of them.
I am not willing to trade/sacrifice Syrian lives for protection from ISIS, and don't care if Assad wipes out entire towns and regions with Putin's help. ISIS are not a sufficient threat to me. Other people are willing to make that trade, I ask them not to include me in their "we".
ISIS are not the same thing as Islamic extremism. Wiping them out of Syria won't wipe out Islamic extremism where it exists within the UK. If anything, it would have the opposite effect.
Only this summer 30 British citizens were murdered by an ISIS trained terrorist. Tell their families that ISIS pose no threat to the West.
An estimated 1,000 UK citizens are currently fighting with and being trained by ISIS.
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
Sorry mate, but that is far too black and white. It is already pretty clear that yesterday Russia bombed positions which are nothing to do with ISIS forces.
One of the side effects of Putin's activity is to increase the flow of refugees to Western Europe. This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia. This is a key part of Putin's overall strategy.
Your last sentence was correct. But facing up to it, rather than cowering in the corner, hoping it won't come to my door, is the way to deal with it. That's why I agree with @IA
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia.
Not seen this claim before. Is it claimed by the same source that Russia funded the Ukrainian far right Nazi party that staged a coup against the elected government thus giving Russia the excuse to invade?
Who is making this claim(that Russia is funding far right populist groups)? Have you got a link?
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia.
Not seen this claim before. Is it claimed by the same source that Russia funded the Ukrainian far right Nazi party that staged a coup against the elected government thus giving Russia the excuse to invade?
Who is making this claim? Have you got a link?
This is just the very first one in the list of the Google search, which really you could have made yourself...
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
Sorry mate, but that is far too black and white. It is already pretty clear that yesterday Russia bombed positions which are nothing to do with ISIS forces.
One of the side effects of Putin's activity is to increase the flow of refugees to Western Europe. This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia. This is a key part of Putin's overall strategy.
Your last sentence was correct. But facing up to it, rather than cowering in the corner, hoping it won't come to my door, is the way to deal with it. That's why I agree with @IA
Why am I wrong ? Putin has no intention of missing out on killing anyone that is anti Assad be that freedom fighting Kurds or IS. The trade of for the west is that Putin crushes IS at the expense of the rebels. Pretty sick given the tyranny of Assad but as I posted earlier it's just collateral damage and the west will wring it's hands.
If Putin can put pressure on the west in terms of increasing the flow of refugees to Europe thus destabilising the EU and increasing the possibility of a British exit then that's certainly a bonus for him.
I totally agree with Red in SE8 that at this moment in time IS is a far more of a threat to me here in Great Britain than Russia is. That's not to say that I am complacent with the threat Putin poses but like most things in life you cross your bridges when you come to them. IS and Muslim extremism is the large looming gold plated bridge I see right in front of me.
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia.
Not seen this claim before. Is it claimed by the same source that Russia funded the Ukrainian far right Nazi party that staged a coup against the elected government thus giving Russia the excuse to invade?
Who is making this claim? Have you got a link?
This is just the very first one in the list of the Google search, which really you could have made yourself...
The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev.
I am reluctant to continue this debate over the keyboard because I know it is something (Putin and Russia) that you feel strongly about and when people feel strongly about things keyboard debates can spiral quickly out of control. I refer you to my Abuse Flag count! But you are a poster on here who I have the utmost respect for and I suspect we essentially share the same values and world view.
I often have very lively debates/arguments about all sorts of stuff in Greenwich pubs with ShootersHiilGuru. I know that you know him from your work on the trust. Perhaps in one of your future visits the three of us can meet and discuss this issue over a pint.
I'm 60 and I can't think of one situation in my lifetime that has turned out better because British military has been involved. So I think we should not get involved in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East unless there is a clear and unambiguous existential threat to the UK. Our efforts should be focused on peace, humanitarian aid and nothing else.
I'm 60 and I can't think of one situation in my lifetime that has turned out better because British military has been involved. So I think we should not get involved in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East unless there is a clear and unambiguous existential threat to the UK. Our efforts should be focused on peace, humanitarian aid and nothing else.
If only you were between 12 and 15 years older......
Comments
We need to be in talks with Putin and the Turks. Unfortunate, but that's what it has come down to. Defeat IS at all costs before addressing anything else. The clock is ticking.
UK and US are bombing ISIS positions, further action would likely require land invasion.
Land invasion brings with it the very likely prospect of ISIS kidnapping a Western soldier and beheading that soldier on video to be shared across social media.
Western armies have always struggled against guerrilla forces. Anything less than wiping out ISIS would be seen as "defeat".
That's just a starter for why the West doesn't want to intervene.
I reiterate that I am not scared of ISIS. I am not calling for a Western invasion, nor do I need Putin to protect me.
That Arab Spring thing went quite well well didn't it?
No wonder Corbyn is reluctant to commit to short term military action, although perhaps he will get cosy with Putin sometime.
Anyone who sees this Russian move as simply a decisive move against terrorists, because Russia shares our fear and loathing of their values is hopelessly naive. If you don't fancy reading any books then at least you can follow the spoof Vladimir Putin on Twitter. It is of course a cynical caricature, but it is also a portrayal of the real Russian mindset.
Finally I did not wish the phrase "hopelessly naive" to be taken as a personal criticism of anyone here. Round about 1991 that would describe exactly my attitude to Russia. You might even add "romantically" . I've had the mother of all lessons in the succeeding years. I don't expect everyone to see what I'm on about, but I have to try. Not least on behalf of the people nearest and dearest in this place I now call home. ( a place described by Neville Chamberlain, a cowardly appeaser who disgraced the name of Great Britain, as "a faraway country of which we know little")
Problem solved.
I don't think your pants filling ability would be up for debate if you were confronted with a religious fanatic that wouldn't think twice about cutting your brave little head off.
It's easy to espouse a certain position when not confronted with the true realities you'd face if in their company.
The world is a very sick place.
So, in theory, the locals should just see Putin as a servant of God's will shouldn't they? Nothing we need to get involved with.
There's no doubt about it. If confronted by them, they would probably kill me, in whatever fashion they liked. But the same is true of various terrorists and groups around the world. I'm not scared of ISIS because they're thousands of miles away and they show no indication of having the organisation capabilities to establish a state to threaten any Western state. They're good at internet marketing, which is why so many people are afraid of them.
I am not willing to trade/sacrifice Syrian lives for protection from ISIS, and not care if Assad wipes out entire towns and regions with Putin's help. ISIS are not a sufficient threat to me. Other people are willing to make that trade, I ask them not to include me in their "we".
ISIS are not the same thing as Islamic extremism. Wiping them out of Syria won't wipe out Islamic extremism where it exists within the UK. If anything, it would have the opposite effect.
*edit to change wording. I do care if Assad wipes out Syrian towns and regions
An estimated 1,000 UK citizens are currently fighting with and being trained by ISIS.
One of the side effects of Putin's activity is to increase the flow of refugees to Western Europe. This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia. This is a key part of Putin's overall strategy.
Your last sentence was correct. But facing up to it, rather than cowering in the corner, hoping it won't come to my door, is the way to deal with it. That's why I agree with @IA
Who is making this claim(that Russia is funding far right populist groups)? Have you got a link?
This is just the very first one in the list of the Google search, which really you could have made yourself...
If Putin can put pressure on the west in terms of increasing the flow of refugees to Europe thus destabilising the EU and increasing the possibility of a British exit then that's certainly a bonus for him.
I totally agree with Red in SE8 that at this moment in time IS is a far more of a threat to me here in Great Britain than Russia is. That's not to say that I am complacent with the threat Putin poses but like most things in life you cross your bridges when you come to them. IS and Muslim extremism is the large looming gold plated bridge I see right in front of me.
Do people think that Russia dropping bombs in Syria will reduce the likelihood of British-based extremists carrying out a terrorist attack in the UK?
I am reluctant to continue this debate over the keyboard because I know it is something (Putin and Russia) that you feel strongly about and when people feel strongly about things keyboard debates can spiral quickly out of control. I refer you to my Abuse Flag count! But you are a poster on here who I have the utmost respect for and I suspect we essentially share the same values and world view.
I often have very lively debates/arguments about all sorts of stuff in Greenwich pubs with ShootersHiilGuru. I know that you know him from your work on the trust. Perhaps in one of your future visits the three of us can meet and discuss this issue over a pint.
Unfortunately at the moment it seems for the second day they are not bombing ISIS positions.