Thread: How involved in the war agains IS will the U.S. get?

The new coalition consisting of what, the US, UK and a few ME nations all of who currently support ISIS. Most ME countries will jump at the chance to kill Syrians under the "protection" of the US and UK.

Another excuse for another illegal war. Farce.

Originally Posted by OhOh

The new coalition consisting of what, the US, UK and a few ME nations all of who currently support ISIS. Most ME countries will jump at the chance to kill Syrians under the "protection" of the US and UK.

Another excuse for another illegal war. Farce.

They always are.

The enemy of my enemy is......??

Does not the POTUS along with other NATO members require a parliamentary/congress vote to legalise acts of war? Do ME countries government vote to go to war?

UK corrected itself straight away.. there's coin to be made

Number 10 has insisted possible military action against Islamic State (IS) in Syria has not been ruled out. BBC News - 'Nothing ruled out' over Syria - Number 10

The Syrian foreign minister on Newsnight hit the nail on the head

I'm saying to the West, you have to get real: Obama is planning to support people who are just like IS @BouthainaShaban #newsnight

I don't think they'll be inviting her to speak again.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry continues the effort to build a U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State militants at a conference Monday in Paris that brings together diplomats from 26 countries, the United Nations, European Union and the Arab League.

French President Francois Hollande and Iraqi President Fouad Massoum are hosting the meeting focusing on peace and security in Iraq, where Islamic State militants have seized large areas in the northern and western part of the country.

Kerry said Sunday that a growing number of countries are prepared to join the fight, including those in the Middle East and elsewhere offering to give military assistance and carry out airstrikes, if needed.

But Iraqi President Massoum told the Associated Press that it is not necessary for Arab powers to conduct airstrikes, saying what is needed is for them to "participate in the decisions" of the conference.

He highlighted the importance of taking action against the Islamic State group, saying it is "in the interest of everyone."

"If this group installs itself in Iraq, this will create of a lot of problems in Iraq, the region and the world. We must try to be helped by other countries so there is international mobilization against this group that wants to install itself in Iraq and from there unleash itself on the world,” said Massoum.

Iran is not one of the 26 countries participating in the conference. Massoum said he thinks Iran should have been invited, given the long shared border with Iraq and the humanitarian aid Iran has been providing during the crisis.

Kerry said during an interview on CBS television's Face the Nation that the United States will not be coordinating with Syria in fighting Islamic State militants. He said the Syrian government had plenty of opportunity to confront the group and has not done so. He said Syrian opposition forces will be helped in their ongoing fight against the group.

Also Sunday, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said his country will soon deploy 600 military personnel and several jet fighters to the region in response to a formal request from the U.S. for international help.

US Continues Building Coalition as Diplomats Gather to Discuss Islamic State

it is not necessary for Arab powers to conduct airstrikes, saying what is needed is for them to "participate in the decisions"

Iran is not one of the 26 countries participating in the conference.

will not be coordinating with Syria

Syrian opposition forces will be helped

So.. no involvement with Syria, no involvement with Iran and what about the elephant in the room Turkey..?
IS doesn't recognise borders and neither do US air strkes.
This is another major clusterfuck in the making!
Why are Aus, UK etc getting on board with this..?
And Arab countries don't have to take an active role.!!? WTF not?

This world is crazy for war

It might mean that Britain will just bomb Iraq and might just accidentally drop a few bombs in Syria on the way back home due to a technical hitch.

Originally Posted by Neverna

It might mean that Britain will just bomb Iraq and might just accidentally drop a few bombs in Syria on the way back home due to a technical hitch.

My read is they will do whatever they desire. After all, its in the name of national security.

Stop this menace: UK steps closer to taking military action against Isis | World news | The Guardian

UK was "ready to take whatever steps are necessary" to deal with the threat of Isis.

As the 40+ nation coalition forms ...

Originally Posted by bowie

After all, its in the name of national security.

Who's national security?

The never ending cycle - The pursuit of an impossible dream – “Peace in the Middle East"

Throughout recorded history the Middle East has been a “killing fields”

And it sure doesn’t look like that’s going to change anytime in the near future.

And what about the airstrikes that are going to be needed on Turkish soil..?

The EUrocrats and their IMF paymasters are keeping a lid on Turkish involvement in the hope they can still get Turkey in the EU and get their grubby hands on Turkish markets.

The Turks give IS safe haven on the border in the hope they'll eradicate the Kurds, which the Turks have been fighting on their southern border for years (PKK) ..

Now the US (coalition) wants to arm the Kurds to use as a tool against IS and no doubt against Assad, but what then..?
The parallel with the Mujahadeen vs the Soviets is obvious. The Kurds carve out an autonomous region that conflicts with Turkish sovereignty... a clusterfuck in the making of the highest order.

Why the fuck are the US and it's 'allies' having to deal with this.!?

This recent Newsnight interview with the Syrian foreign minister is worth watching as it shows the gulf in reality between the Western media clinical depiction of this crisis and the reality of the anarchy brought about by the Syrian conflict.

Kirsty Wark is a total cnut and establishment shill, but at least Newsnight aired this interview.
I don't have any sympathy for Assad either, but the truth will out.

The POTUS has declared his Syrian solution already, according to the NYT at least.

"He made clear the intricacy of the situation, though, as he contemplated the possibility that Mr. Assad might order his forces to fire at American planes entering Syrian airspace. If he dared to do that, Mr. Obama said he would order American forces to wipe out Syria’s air defense system, which he noted would be easier than striking ISIS because its locations are better known. He went on to say that such an action by Mr. Assad would lead to his overthrow, according to one account."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/wo...bama.html?_r=0

Aren't some of the "Syrian Air Defences" located aboard Russian ships in the Mediterranean? Hasn't Russia already stated it would be seen as an act of war? Didn't his military advisers advise him not to stir that particular hornets nest a while ago.

What has changed, three dead Christians?

The RAF are already there , parked around Baghdad airports, ready to pound targets, not long to go and reports of bombing strikes by RAF aircraft will filter through.

If you believe it's about 3 Christians from NATO countries God help you.

Isn't the UN allegedly the forum for these types of discussions? Or do they already know they would never again get a positive vote for yet another illegal war, where they get kicked out by a bunch of "ragheads".

It's sickening.

The apathy is overwhelming

Originally Posted by OhOh

UK airstrikes against Islamic State extremists in Syria could be illegal

hmm ... well now that changes everything, shit!

US Expands Airstrikes on Islamic State in Iraq

U.S. jets have bombed Islamic State targets southwest of Baghdad, in an expansion of the U.S. campaign against the militant group in Iraq.

The Pentagon said late Monday this is the first strike as part of an expanded effort to go beyond protecting U.S. personnel and interests, as Islamic State goes on the offensive.

Another airstrike was carried out near Mount Sinjar in northern Iraq.

President Barack Obama told the nation last week that the U.S. would expand its military effort against Islamic State and lead a relentless effort to destroy the militants wherever they exist.

Obama has authorized airstrikes on Islamic State in Syria, but has not yet decided whether to launch them.

A senior official has warned Syria not to interfere with U.S. air action, saying the U.S. could retaliate against Syrian air defense systems.

Obama has ruled out working with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad against Islamic State, which is fighting to topple him. The U.S. regards President Assad as an illegitimate leader and a criminal.

More here: US Expands Airstrikes on Islamic State in Iraq

Originally Posted by OhOh

Does not the POTUS along with other NATO members require a parliamentary/congress vote to legalise acts of war? Do ME countries government vote to go to war?

You may be surprised to know that the last time the USA declared war on another country was in 1942. I certainly was. They just seem to have been bombing the rest of the world since then for fun ?