Stealth Helicopter used in Osama Raid

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Why is Islamic State a US problem?

Probably somewhere along the lines of our 'coalition of the willing' going in, disposing of a dictator who was keeping his region in check. Maybe it was that Iraq wanted to sell oil in Euros rather than USD?

They dispose of him and it just allowed some other nutjobs to come in like they have now.

Funny how Iraq and Libya have gone into chaos when we dispose of their dictator, what do Saddam and Al-Gaddafi have in common? Both wanted to sell oil in other currencies instead of USD.

The Middle East functions better under dictatorships.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Probably somewhere along the lines of our 'coalition of the willing' going in, disposing of a dictator who was keeping his region in check. Maybe it was that Iraq wanted to sell oil in Euros rather than USD?

They dispose of him and it just allowed some other nutjobs to come in like they have now.

Funny how Iraq and Libya have gone into chaos when we dispose of their dictator, what do Saddam and Al-Gaddafi have in common? Both wanted to sell oil in other currencies instead of USD.

The Middle East functions better under dictatorships.

That doesn't explain nor answer why dealing with IS is a problem only for the US.

I'm no fan of the Iraq War either, or the lies, but laying the blame for the rise of IS at the feet of the "coalition of the willing" is way short of the mark.

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

That doesn't explain nor answer why dealing with IS is a problem only for the US.

I'm no fan of the Iraq War either, or the lies, but laying the blame for the rise of IS at the feet of the "coalition of the willing" is way short of the mark.

Colin Powell... "once you break it, you are going to own it, and we’re going to be responsible for 26 million people standing there looking at us. And it’s going to suck up a good 40 to 50 percent of the Army for years. And it’s going to take all the oxygen out of the political environment"

It is broken and ISIS has risen out of the ashes. It is a problem for the world but only because the coalition of the willing broke it.

This is a festering wound that will consume trillions of $$ that could have been spent far more wisely.
Putting toothpaste back into the tube is an analogy that comes to mind.

[PridenJoy]

Originally Posted by Moby Vic

q.e.d.

a.b.c.

Anyone can type letters bud. Care to explain?

[PridenJoy]

Originally Posted by Bill M

Colin Powell... "once you break it, you are going to own it, and we’re going to be responsible for 26 million people standing there looking at us. And it’s going to suck up a good 40 to 50 percent of the Army for years. And it’s going to take all the oxygen out of the political environment"

It is broken and ISIS has risen out of the ashes. It is a problem for the world but only because the coalition of the willing broke it.

This is a festering wound that will consume trillions of $$ that could have been spent far more wisely.
Putting toothpaste back into the tube is an analogy that comes to mind.

Agreed but to further highlight this, Road warrior, can you explain why US is 'dealing' with the ISIS problem in Iraq and a little in Syria but completely washing their hands of Libya which has arguably a larger ISIS problem than Iraq due to having no real government and is in complete kaos, Libya also poses a greater risk to the west considering its close proximity to the EU. The answer might have something to do with a country that has SA initials.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by PridenJoy

Agreed but to further highlight this, Road warrior, can you explain why US is 'dealing' with the ISIS problem in Iraq and a little in Syria but completely washing their hands of Libya which has arguably a larger ISIS problem than Iraq due to having no real government and is in complete kaos, Libya also poses a greater risk to the west considering its close proximity to the EU. The answer might have something to do with a country that has SA initials.

The answer is Iran.

The US wants to curb growing Iranian influence in Iraq. Having a Shiite government in Iraq has brought Iran into the equation never seen before, they are very buddy-buddy and Washington doesn’t like it. The SA country you refer to like it even less. Which is why Saudi Arabia is getting stuck into these Houthi rebels in Yemen, because they are Shiite, getting $$$ and arms from Iran, and SA is afraid of being bracketed by Shiite-dominated regimes that are hostile to it.

The US isn't going to get in Saudi Arabia's way, the IS threat in Libya might be growing but is nothing like Iraq and Syria (IS just overrun Ramadi over the weekend, a city west of Baghdad with a population of 200K). This is all regional religious politics at work.

IS would love nothing more than for the yanks to get involved, boots and all in Iraq again. It would be the rallying cry for jihad they have dreamed of for ages and individuals of that mindset would flock to the place from all over the world, just because of the prospect of killing western infidels. This is what IS want, what they feed off, and there is no way in hell we should give it to them.

[PridenJoy]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

The answer is Iran.

The US wants to curb growing Iranian influence in Iraq. Having a Shiite government in Iraq has brought Iran into the equation never seen before, they are very buddy-buddy and Washington doesn’t like it. The SA country you refer to like it even less. Which is why Saudi Arabia is getting stuck into these Houthi rebels in Yemen, because they are Shiite, getting $$$ and arms from Iran, and SA is afraid of being bracketed by Shiite-dominated regimes that are hostile to it.

The US isn't going to get in Saudi Arabia's way, the IS threat in Libya might be growing but is nothing like Iraq and Syria (IS just overrun Ramadi over the weekend, a city west of Baghdad with a population of 200K). This is all regional religious politics at work.

IS would love nothing more than for the yanks to get involved, boots and all in Iraq again. It would be the rallying cry for jihad they have dreamed of for ages and individuals of that mindset would flock to the place from all over the world, just because of the prospect of killing western infidels. This is what IS want, what they feed off, and there is no way in hell we should give it to them.

Yes and all that is basically what I was alluding to, the US is doing whatever SA wants them to do in the region, SA dictates what action US takes. Which explains why Libya is left alone, because SA simply doesn't care what happens there, no shiite problems there for SA to worry about. It may appear the IS situation there is not as bad as Iraq or Syria but it only appears that way because no one is actually fighting them in Libya, they have much more control there than in Iraq where Shiite militias fight them and in Syria where Asaad's army and Kurds fight them.

I agree ISIS is not US problem, hence they should completely withdraw and let the Arabs deal with the IS problem as has been suggested by Sissi and an Arab united force is now being arranged to fight ISIS. But of course US would not enjoy the prospect of such force and hence they are doing what they can to show such a force is not necessary but in reality doing the absolute minimum to rid the world of ISIS. US is there for US reasons, playing political games as I mentioned.

Anyway I suspect this is way off topic now, so that's it from me on this.

[CoupeKing]

Remember that Obama wanted to go into Syria when Assad used chemical weapons on his own people. But he received a phone- call from Putin advising him not to interfere directly. Russia supply most of the Assad regime's military hardware. Not long after that, Putin went into Crimea,then parts of Ukraine sealing a 400 Billion gas deal with China.

As for America not doing enough in Iraq (mostly northern and parts of Syria)....Well that's why a coalition was formed that incorporated surrounding Arab states. It's a world problem. If ISIS had their way, that entire region would be under their flag. Even some of that coalition that still support the Palestinian cause needed no convincing in stopping ISIS, especially after seeing footage of what they did to people who wouldn't convert.

America had been supplying and training (still are) Iraq's Military. But a conflict between the Muslim denomination's ended up in one party sacking most the 'trained' officers (similar thing happened in the Red Army purges pre WW2), so when ISIS stormed the border most of the troops just ran.

[Road_Warrior]

So, yeah, about that helicopter:



Nice try.

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Moby Vic

When we do something we're imperialists; when we don't we're just playing games.

I have spent time in your country Moby, at the risk of unintentionally offending you and your friends it was blatantly obvious to me how utterly patriotically brainwashed you all are there.

Your govt is only interested in controlling the oil in the middle east, and it achieves that by controlling the puppet govts there.

Your govt is only Australias friend because we have most of the known uranium reserves on the planet.

If it's not in America's national interest you don't put any effort in.

Just so happens that oil is in your national interest, as is the pipeline through Afghanistan...as is the uranium in Australia...(which has a US base next to it)

These poor buggers in the middle east only have oil, once that runs out they have nothing, they know it, we know it and that's why they want to control it themselves.

[MercurySilver]

Originally Posted by Polyal

^^And thats only the stuff we end up hearing about, usually because they stuff something..LOL

yup
imagine the tech they have that we dont even know about
when youre holding 3 aces you only show 1