Isis \ isil

Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average.
(2 votes)
Results 26 to 50 of 1246

  1. Post
    #26
    DaManiac wrote:
    It's a good thing the US have started initiating airstrikes to help the Iraqis out against ISIS.
    I have to agree. Any action there is a good thing. I'd be inclined to even support US / Allies ground troops.

  2. Post
    #27
    it will either get alot worse or calms really down because of the new PM, fingers crossed..

  3. Post
    #28
    America armed ISIS in Syria. and once ISIS realised they weren't getting anywhere fighting the SAA they decided to go into Iraq.

    American intervention back firing once again. America needs to go into Iraq and clean up the mess they created.

  4. Post
    #29
    Yeah, I was really against the idea of the US invading Iraq the first time, but putting an end to ISIS would really be flat out humanitarian now.

  5. Post
    #30
    I've recently being taking the time to research the Quran and what Islam teaches, and also the effects on western countries when Muslim populations reach certain percentage.

    Quite scary reading out there if anyone chooses to find out.

  6. Post
    #31
    heylinb4nz wrote:
    I've recently being taking the time to research the Quran and what Islam teaches, and also the effects on western countries when Muslim populations reach certain percentage.

    Quite scary reading out there if anyone chooses to find out.
    Link?

  7. Post
    #32
    Russell Brand really helps to give perspective.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUcGGk1XC30

  8. Post
    #33
    iAmDynamic wrote:
    America armed ISIS in Syria. and once ISIS realised they weren't getting anywhere fighting the SAA they decided to go into Iraq.

    American intervention back firing once again. America needs to go into Iraq and clean up the mess they created.
    They were ****ing idiots for getting involved in Syria. Ameri****s are so dumb

  9. Post
    #34
    I disagree with Brand on this one. While that senator is off his nut if he thinks that ISIS has any kind of capability of invading the United States any time soon, they are actively committing genocide in the region and performing brutal public mass executions. Its hard to think of what a group that would be worse than ISIS in the region could look like. Maybe they could be big on puppy torture as well?

  10. Post
    #35
    iAmDynamic wrote:
    America armed ISIS in Syria. and once ISIS realised they weren't getting anywhere fighting the SAA they decided to go into Iraq.

    American intervention back firing once again. America needs to go into Iraq and clean up the mess they created.
    Where are you getting the information that the US armed ISIS in Syria? I would like to read up about this.

  11. Post
    #36
    Mikos wrote:
    Where are you getting the information that the US armed ISIS in Syria? I would like to read up about this.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A0Q1S320140127

  12. Post
    #37
    Not sure if you actually read that link?

    As per that link and plenty of other articles online, the US did commit some very small scale funding of Rebel groups in Syria but they were predominately not Islamic rebels and not ISIS ... The vast weight of articles I have read specifically detail the US funded and even tried to persuade groups to attack ISIS in syria.

    The weapons, most of which are moving to non-Islamist Syrian rebels
    Furthermore, as per your link, when it became apparent that there was a real risk of ISIS potentially appropriating weapons from other rebels groups lethal aid was ended.

    The United States and Britain suspended non-lethal aid to northern Syria in December after reports that Islamist fighters seized Western-backed rebel weapons warehouses, highlighting fears that supplies could end up in hostile hands.
    So I would ask IamDynamic again, Where are you getting the information that the US armed ISIS in Syria? I would like to read up about this.

  13. Post
    #38
    We cant had the Saudis ..

    "The Saudi King is paying millions of dollars to have nearly 2000 of his people educated in New Zealand."

    :O

  14. Post
    #39
    Mikos wrote:
    Not sure if you actually read that link?

    As per that link and plenty of other articles online, the US did commit some very small scale funding of Rebel groups in Syria but they were predominately not Islamic rebels and not ISIS ... The vast weight of articles I have read specifically detail the US funded and even tried to persuade groups to attack ISIS in syria.



    Furthermore, as per your link, when it became apparent that there was a real risk of ISIS potentially appropriating weapons from other rebels groups lethal aid was ended.



    So I would ask IamDynamic again, Where are you getting the information that the US armed ISIS in Syria? I would like to read up about this.
    The "non-islamic rebels" were ISIS, they can't control where their weapons go because they are using proxies for the deliveries.

    Example:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/wo...anted=all&_r=0

  15. Post
    #40
    werewolves? wrote:
    The "non-islamic rebels" were ISIS, they can't control where their weapons go because they are using proxies for the deliveries.

    Example:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/wo...anted=all&_r=0
    The non Islamic rebels were not ISIS. The previous article very clearly says ISIS appropriated the weapons from other rebels by force in Syria. The US was supplying other rebels not ISIS. The fact that ISIS has US weapons does not mean the US is supplying ISIS. Quite on the contrary they were supplying weapons to the other groups to help combat ISIS. ISIS is also using some russian and large amounts of Syrian government weapons. Does this mean one can claim that the Russians and the Syrian government are supporting ISIS? Of course not.

    To say the US supplied ISIS would then be a logical fallacy. Your argument would be equivalent to concluding that a person in NZ gave money to the Labour party if they gave money to an associate and then subsequently that associate gave some of that same money to the Labour party. This plainly does not logically follow.

    I dont even know what the relevance of your new link is to this discussion. It is not even talking about the US supplying weapons. Clearly it is about Qatar supplying weapons that the US has allowed and encouraged. At no point in that article is there any reference to the US paying for or supplying weapons.

  16. Post
    #41
    heylinb4nz wrote:
    I've recently being taking the time to research the Quran and what Islam teaches, and also the effects on western countries when Muslim populations reach certain percentage.

    Quite scary reading out there if anyone chooses to find out.
    By researching, you meaning reading it, right?

    It's interesting reading if you can become accustomed to being called a loser and knowing you're going to burn in hell for eternity.

  17. Post
    #42
    eug1404 wrote:
    It's never been the Saudi government that supported IS, but rather the clerics and wealthy citizens. One of the Caliphates main stated goals is to free Mecca from the tyranny of the Saudi royal family, they have repeatedly vowed to destroy the House of Saud.
    These clerics and wealthy citizens get their power through representing the Saudi monarchy and it's interests. It's no secret that ISIS are adherents to the wahhabi ideology which is most powerful in the Gulf States and the official religion of Saudi Arabia.

    It's also my opinion that a lot of the weapons ISIS are using are hand me downs from Gulf States after their massive US weaponry buy out.

  18. Post
    #43
    Mikos wrote:
    The non Islamic rebels were not ISIS. The previous article very clearly says ISIS appropriated the weapons from other rebels by force in Syria. The US was supplying other rebels not ISIS. The fact that ISIS has US weapons does not mean the US is supplying ISIS. Quite on the contrary they were supplying weapons to the other groups to help combat ISIS. ISIS is also using some russian and large amounts of Syrian government weapons. Does this mean one can claim that the Russians and the Syrian government are supporting ISIS? Of course not.

    To say the US supplied ISIS would then be a logical fallacy. Your argument would be equivalent to concluding that a person in NZ gave money to the Labour party if they gave money to an associate and then subsequently that associate gave some of that same money to the Labour party. This plainly does not logically follow.

    I dont even know what the relevance of your new link is to this discussion. It is not even talking about the US supplying weapons. Clearly it is about Qatar supplying weapons that the US has allowed and encouraged. At no point in that article is there any reference to the US paying for or supplying weapons.
    I don't know the details of this case, but the Americans have a bit of a track record of spraying weapons and other hardware around groups in unstable regions that seem to be in line with their agenda at the time, only to later realise that either a) they don't suit their agenda (Castro and the Taliban spring to mind) or b) because it's such an unstable region, the weapons end up in someone elses hands.

    Basically pumping weapons into a warzone ends with their being more weapons in the warzone and a greater chance of everything turning to **** in a way you don't want.

  19. Post
    #44
    those US air strikes are so fkn badass they made me smile.. burn you stupid IS animals

  20. Post
    #45
    You sound just like them

  21. Post
    #46
    iAmDynamic wrote:
    America armed ISIS in Syria. and once ISIS realised they weren't getting anywhere fighting the SAA they decided to go into Iraq.

    American intervention back firing once again. America needs to go into Iraq and clean up the mess they created.
    Thought it was Turkey with these guys, not America? http://www.cnbc.com/id/101916826#. Read it a lot of other places too

  22. Post
    #47
    heylinb4nz wrote:
    Funny as soon as the oil fields come under threat they act.

    I guess it solves a few problems

    a) US look good to Iraqi's for aiding them
    b) oil fields safe
    c) ISIS go over to Syria and fight Assad

    Once Assad is overthrown the US will team up with Israel and finish ISIS off....hopefully bringing stability back the region for a while.

    Pretty sure the majority of Muslims just want the same things we westerners want, to worship their god in peace, raise their kids and run a business (or have a job).
    Rekuja wrote:
    What's happening in Iraq is absolutely disgusting, it's a genocide basically... thousands of Assyrians, Kurds, etc are being slaughtered, beheading children even....

    ISIS are a bunch of thugs that need to be destroyed, plain and simple.
    ISIS do need to be stopped, but not at the cost of some country losing face being accused helping them "just to protect oil fields". US should pull out at let ISIS do their thing, that way they can't be accused of just doing it for the oil. I mean whats more important saving innocents, or protecting yourself from being falsely accused?

    Heylinb4nz you need a slap in the face, you think the Iraq's being rescued or the US give a F if some retard like you half a world away thinks is all being done just for the oil

  23. Post
    #48
    no1 sane would want the existing of these people. my response was completely fine especially when its pointed at IS.



    Hamburglar wrote:
    You sound just like them
    PM Nouri stepped down in favour of haidar alabadi..

    so sad to see such an honest person leave.. a hero in my eyes and imo.
    Last edited by hammed; 15th August 2014 at 11:33 am.

  24. Post
    #49
    hammed wrote:
    those US air strikes are so fkn badass they made me smile.. burn you stupid IS animals
    You have a link to said badassery?

  25. Post
    #50
    hammed wrote:
    no1 sane would want the existing of these people. my response was completely fine especially when its pointed at IS.
    It's not fine, it's psychopathic.

    Besides, aren't you pro-Hamas? Another militant Islamic caliphate group? How is this any different? You're a violent troll.