The all purpose terrorism thread featuring plenty of allah akbar

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Hitler and what happened in WWII pales in comparision to what the British Empire did in India, China, North America, Kenya, Malaya, Tasmania, North America, Australia, South Africa just to name a few.

Heck reading history books from the losing side perspective I found that under British rule from 1757-1947 1.8 billion died from slavery, starvation, execution etc etc just in India alone.

I've honestly no idea how accurate your figure is without a link to the source but what I will say is........Hitlers actions were carried out in a miniscule area compared to the list of countries you are making mention of regarding the British Empire (North America twice).

[Skybird]

Me too would like to see a source for or the reasoning behind this 1.8 bn number. Mind you: at the late 19th/early 20th century the global population was just two thirds of that number, something about 1+ bn.

[Oberon]

I wouldn't entirely be surprised by that high figure, although it does seem a bit high, but I mean we created Concentration camps (although they were intended for internment rather than extermination), and the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, however I can't think of instances outside of Ireland and Scotland where the British government has undertook a deliberate course of ethnic cleansing. Except perhaps in Australia/Tasmania towards the indigenous habitants. The policy in India was more towards subjecation rather than destruction.

[mapuc]

Back to the civil war in Syria

Earlier today I saw and expert on Russia saying on Danish news that the only way to stop Russia from bombing/supporting Assad was to put action behind the words-draw a line and threaten to engage them(Russia/Syria) if they cross that line

It's the only type of language the Russians understand

Furthermore, some days ago some Danish politicians wanted to extend the Danish mandate around the engagement in Syria and Iraq. The mandate today give the Danish Air force to attack Daesh in Iraq and Syria and only Daesh.

Markus

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by mapuc

It's the only type of language the Russians understand

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Back to the civil war in Syria

Earlier today I saw and expert on Russia saying on Danish news that the only way to stop Russia from bombing/supporting Assad was to put action behind the words-draw a line and threaten to engage them(Russia/Syria) if they cross that line

Do we want to stop Russia from supporting Assad ??
A lot of members of Subsim stated, me included, that Assad is the least of the 4 evils in the region and if anything, the Russians should take it up a notch.

[em2nought]

The whole Syria things feels a bit like this. Something that starts off small, and then grows like a metal fire on a British frigate in the Falklands.

[Catfish]

Before the whole mess got out of control, it would have been a good idea to stop or remove Assad from Syria's "government". But who would have been the next dictator? The, at first, promising arabian spring revolutions have somehow come to nought everywhere.
Now Assad seems to be the lesser evil in the region, which only shows how bad all the rest has developed, in comparison.

Originally Posted by Betonov

Do we want to stop Russia from supporting Assad ??

We the West sure do not win hearts with bombing hospitals and own forces, if erroneously (or not, who knows), or with not having a strategy clear to all involved.
Russia is always bad, we have learned this in the cradle, but we at least know that they support Assad.
Who do we support? Really, and over time?

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by em2nought

The whole Syria things feels a bit like this. Something that starts off small, and then grows like a metal fire on a British frigate in the Falklands.

I sincerely hope you're joking. When I think of frigates in the Falklands I can't help but remember there were 86 Royal Navy personnel lost during that period.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by em2nought

The whole Syria things feels a bit like this. Something that starts off small, and then grows like a metal fire on a British frigate in the Falklands.

When WW1 broke everyone was able and itching to go.
Austria Hungary was just waiting for a reason to strike at Serbia, France just needed one spark to attack Germany. Germanies declaration of war against an ally Russia was more like an early christmas pressent. Britain was ready to cut the upstarts down to size and Belgium being violated was an excellent opportunity.
And we're talking about a full blown war, not a proxy war.

Right now it seems only the US is willing to go to war to counter Russia, and even there the population is shifting to pacifist.
Europe ?? Forget it, going into Syria is the a more effective way to loose the elections than hookers and fraud.

[Mr Quatro]

I always gave credit to President Obama for being a fence sitter and that was why we didn't have boots on the ground in Syria, but now I have to change my mind and realize that it was the US Congress that kept us from sending troops to Syria: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/01/politi...ria/index.html


Kerry said this in a leaked audio tape recently

I lost the argument. I've argued for the use of force. I'm the guy who stood up and announced that we're going to attack Assad for the use of weapons," Kerry is heard telling the Syrian attendees, referring to internal deliberations within the administration of President Barack Obama that followed Assad's use of chemical weapons in 2013.

Kerry also faulted Congress for failing to support such a retaliatory strike, saying, "The bottom line is that Congress refused even to vote to allow that."

"We have a Congress that will not authorize our use of force," he added, explaining that a new military intervention would be difficult to bring about.

[mapuc]

Yesterday I watched a debate between two Danish politicians one from the left and one from the right.

The person who's from Syria are member in a conservative party (right wing)and he wants as the expert I talked about earlier the west to draw a line ind sand against Russia and Syria

The person from left said several time in the debate-do you want a WWIII
´cause that is what we will end with if we threaten Russia.

All this made me think

Right now there are some hundred of thousand civilians who are in desperat need of help in Syria and there are millions on the run

If the left wing person is correct and a "draw in the sand" will end in a WWIII then it will not be these hundred of thousands in desperat need it will be billions who would be in need-and there will be no help due to breakdown in our community=hospital, social benefits etc etc.

Markus

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

I always gave credit to President Obama for being a fence sitter and that was why we didn't have boots on the ground in Syria, but now I have to change my mind and realize that it was the US Congress that kept us from sending troops to Syria: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/01/politi...ria/index.html


Kerry said this in a leaked audio tape recently

For once I'm glad we're not involved. Any other outcome but an Assad victory will lead to the same crap we've been through in Iraq and Afghanistan = power vacuum = never ending fighting between war lords and radical nut jobs.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

For once I'm glad we're not involved.

We are involved. Recce Tornadoes, tankers, one or two navy units.

Its just that we let others pull the triggers as an alibi that we do not get our hands dirty. We just shoot photos. But the Tornadoes could be downed and their pilots are at a certain risk every time they take off.

We should not be there. Nor any NATO, GBR, FRA, US. Of course also not the Russians, Iranians.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Skybird

We are involved. Recce Tornadoes, tankers, one or two navy units.

Its just that we let others pull the triggers as an alibi that we do not get our hands dirty. We just shoot photos. But the Tornadoes could be downed and their pilots are at a certain risk every time they take off.

We should not be there. Nor any NATO, GBR, FRA, US. Of course also not the Russians, Iranians.

I meant that we're not involved on the ground.