David Cameron is blamed for the rise of ISIS

[papa smurf]

David Cameron's intervention in Libya left the country in ruin, MPs said
Foreign Affairs committee found military action spurred the growth of ISIS
Mr Cameron took the country to war against Colonel Gaddafi
The 'ill-conceived' war is also thought to have fuelled the migrant crisis


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4KCzz0onf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/710...ittee-politics

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...a-intervention

[TheDaddy]

This just sums him up, oportunistic with no plan and no care for the consequences. Him and Blair, different cheeks of the same arse.

[Taf]

Maybe this is why he is "retiring" ?

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

This just sums him up, oportunistic with no plan and no care for the consequences. Him and Blair, different cheeks of the same arse.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

This just sums him up, oportunistic with no plan and no care for the consequences. Him and Blair, different cheeks of the same arse.

I like that

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

This just sums him up, oportunistic with no plan and no care for the consequences. Him and Blair, different cheeks of the same arse.

[adzii_nufc]

The foreign affairs committee 'found' something Putin was openly suggesting a year ago. He blamed the US and it's allies for ISIS. He openly blamed the US for arming ISIS indirectly. I.e they backed the rebels, a lot of which then joined ISIS, arming them and providing them with resources.

He's also stated multiple times that Turkey might as well just directly bankroll them and provided evidence on numerous occasions to support this.

Only when we're called out by our people does it become important? Or is it too embarrasing to be called out by Russia on an occasion they're right. Portraying Putin as correct would bring about the end of days etc.

Just another monumental sack of excrement we couldn't help but keep our noses out of, seems the hip thing to do since Dick Cheney got his war in the middle east.

Suspects Saddam Hussein of harbouring WMD's (Doesn't strictly mean nukes) - Goes to war and hangs him, he's responsible for thousands of deaths and the use of chemical weapons.

Knows North Korea are manufacturing Nuclear devices - Sanctions them. Country is starving, people executed when seen fit. Families murdered, people imprisoned for life without trial for bogus reasons.

We can stop pretending we're fighting because its the right thing to do now..

[Gavin78]

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

The foreign affairs committee 'found' something Putin was openly suggesting a year ago. He blamed the US and it's allies for ISIS. He openly blamed the US for arming ISIS indirectly. I.e they backed the rebels, a lot of which then joined ISIS, arming them and providing them with resources.

He's also stated multiple times that Turkey might as well just directly bankroll them and provided evidence on numerous occasions to support this.

Only when we're called out by our people does it become important? Or is it too embarrasing to be called out by Russia on an occasion they're right. Portraying Putin as correct would bring about the end of days etc.

Just another monumental sack of excrement we couldn't help but keep our noses out of, seems the hip thing to do since Dick Cheney got his war in the middle east.

Suspects Saddam Hussein of harbouring WMD's (Doesn't strictly mean nukes) - Goes to war and hangs him, he's responsible for thousands of deaths and the use of chemical weapons.

Knows North Korea are manufacturing Nuclear devices - Sanctions them. Country is starving, people executed when seen fit. Families murdered, people imprisoned for life without trial for bogus reasons.

We can stop pretending we're fighting because its the right thing to do now..

Well that is just it they wont take on NK a country that might actually have the ability to fight back. instead they have created a world wide problem with ISIS

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

Knows North Korea are manufacturing Nuclear devices - Sanctions them. Country is starving, people executed when seen fit. Families murdered, people imprisoned for life without trial for bogus reasons.

North Korea was staving and killing it's own people long before sanctions. The US, China and South Korea had tried many other routes, including airdropping food during the famine in the early 90s. What's the alternative to sanctions though? Leave them to it? Invade?

We can stop pretending we're fighting because its the right thing to do now..

This isn't a novel realisation. However most of the time we are fighting for, at least what we perceive, to be Western interests. The world isn't a fair place and I would rather Western nations be the ones influencing the world than Russia.

You mentioned Putin previously but his only concern is also expanding Russian influence, he didn't oppose arming the rebels because of a clairvoyance about ISIS getting hold of weapons but because he didn't want Assad toppled and Russian interests there harmed. He is all for propping up brutal dictators too the only difference is that they have no moral qualms about avoiding civilian casualties or the use of chemical weapons.

---------- Post added at 12:47 ---------- Previous post was at 12:43 ----------

Originally Posted by Gavin78

Well that is just it they wont take on NK a country that might actually have the ability to fight back.

There have been plenty of occasions where the US could have taken NK at a canter. They don't because South Korea doesn't want a sudden unification of the peninsula due to the massive upheaval and cost having to take in 25 million citizens, a 50% increase, most of whom would be poor and poorly educated.

Also China wouldn't be best pleased with American forces so close to their border.

[adzii_nufc]

The reasons for not wanting a war in Korea are known, they're valid reasons, the point I tried to make was those reasons also exist in the middle east, are we not being flooded with Migrants? Are people not running from a battle we stuck our nose in. Filled up headlines with great reasons for arming rebels and enabling them to fight back, pictures of wounded and what life is like, the usual messages.

Just didn't quite work out well when said Rebels either joined ISIS or started killing kids on camera. Yep, the men Mr Obama and co armed, the men they supported in the media (Propaganda) were the same men that did the above.

Just trying to view it from an unbiased view. There's no winning either way, The Russians annex a part of Ukraine, The Americans arm rebels turned terrorists. But Damien has a point, a lot just prefer to look at it from a western view. despite a lot of it being the same thing, different country. We're still more civilized nations. We're not a racist, homophobic country after all and a lot of us won't go missing for opposing our leader.

Would just like to see fairness on both sides, something which will never happen if the world continues like this.

But more importantly for me, it's just the desire to see the UK not involved in something major every other year.

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

The reasons for not wanting a war in Korea are known, they're valid reasons, the point I tried to make was those reasons also exist in the middle east, are we not being flooded with Migrants?

That is a unintended consequence, not a desired goal. The long-term international plan is to unify Korea. The goal for middle-eastern intervention was for the countries to govern themselves under new leadership who were able to control the nation, ideally with western interests in mind.

Are people not running from a battle we stuck our nose in. Filled up headlines with great reasons for arming rebels and enabling them to fight back, pictures of wounded and what life is like, the usual messages.

Once a civil war starts it's not unnatural to try and choose a winner. It's not as if Syria would be calm had there been no intervention from the West. Maybe the ideal scenario would have been Assad crushing both ISIS and the more moderate rebels but such an aspiration is hardly a better motivation and would probably be condemned by the same people who admonish the West now.

Just didn't quite work out well when said Rebels either joined ISIS or started killing kids on camera. Yep, the men Mr Obama and co armed, the men they supported in the media (Propaganda) were the same men that did the above.

I doubt ISIS would have struggled to find weapons. The world is armed to the teeth: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...shnikov-ak-47s

Putin and russia are also throwing arms around it's not purely a US or western thing even now containers of weapons and munitions arrive in syria courtesy of vlad and many of them have ended up in isis hands as well. Syria is a goldmine for russia a perfect testing ground for some of their latest weapon systems, a good source of income from arm sales and the appearence of russia playing a part internationally there is nothing benevolent about this on Russia's part whatsoever.

We have massively mishandled things in the middle east and will be paying that cost in many ways for at least a couple of decades and sadly we're likely to keep mishandling it trying to rectify what we screwed up in the first place.