Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Indeed.

We've had 15 months of participation in air strikes against Daesh who are extremely media savvy with propaganda and have plenty of incentive to provide evidence had we got it wrong.

If we were indiscriminately bombing civilians there is no way it wouldn't have got out.

The MOD are being extremely cautious with targeting and are using extremely accurate precision munitions, which of course also means they have high resolution imagery of every strike available to dispute spurious claims of collateral damage.

It is highly probable then that there have in fact been zero civilian casualties from UK air strikes just as they claim.

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

December 7, 2015

Syria: British Airstrike Kills 20 Civilians in Hasaka

TEHRAN (FNA)- Twenty civilians were killed in a US airstrike on Syria’s Northeastern Hasaka province following another US air raid on the Syrian army base in Southeastern Deir Ezzur province that killed several soldiers earlier today. (British planes have been identified as responsible for the Syrian army raid and may well have done this one also.)
The US-led airstrikes hit al-Khan near al-Hawl town in Hasakah, killing 20 civilians and injuring 30 others.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/12/07/syria-british-airstrike-kills-20-civilians-in-hasaka/

Time to wake up chaps.

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

December 7, 2015http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/12/07/syria-british-airstrike-kills-20-civilians-in-hasaka/

Time to wake up chaps.

Just how gullible are you?

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

Even the article states that this has been the modern war that has had the fewest civilian casualties and even then that is despite the deliberate and cowardly actions of ISIS in hiding among the civilian population.

Apart from the, the article seems to be very long on supposition and very short on fact. Surprising that given that there are so many people that seem to be desperate to find some evidence that the UK is killing civilians (as an unfortunate side effect as opposed to ISIS's deliberate policy of murder and rape) and all of them have managed to document 0 deaths.

If you think I'd like to see deaths just to point score then I have no words........

"No reports of civilian casualties" does not fill me with confidence that there have been none. Propaganda happens on all sides.

Leanne1812

.string. wrote: »

Your post made me check on when this Daesh business started.

I found this interesting article --- The Rise of ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria/ISIL/Daesh)

Basically it states that Daesh started in the latter part of 2014 as a result of the then-Iraq Government not workng well with the Sunnis. Daesh started there and expanded into Syria to fill the vacuum left by the civil war.

It's just possible that the decisions of the West not to intervene in Syria may have contributed too the rise of Daesh and the establishment of what is now almost a state.
The Isis papers: leaked documents show how Isis is building its state

Happy to read but none of the links are working.

chris_m

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Happy to read but none of the links are working.

Knock the "http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/" off the front of the url, then hit the [Enter] key.

For some reason, the links the poster provided have been prefixed with the MSE site url.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

December 7, 2015http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/12/07/syria-british-airstrike-kills-20-civilians-in-hasaka/

Time to wake up chaps.

You do realise you're quoting a website that features headlines such as...

'The Holocaust - A Jew on Jew false flag operation'

Even by CyberNat standards that's an outrageous source to be quoting if you expect anyone to take you seriously...

.string.

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Happy to read but none of the links are working.

Sorry about that - I've put the correct urls after the post. They are both interesting reports.

Cheers

.string.

chris_m wrote: »

Knock the "http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/" off the front of the url, then hit the [Enter] key.

For some reason, the links the poster provided have been prefixed with the MSE site url.

Thank you, I've no idea what happened there, I've used that formulation many times ---

Anyway, I changed the post to give a fix.

P.S. - or at least I thought I'd fixed it. When I checked the first reprt the second time I could still access the site, but the third time it did not work and wanted me to sign in or something. So if anyone wants to look at those reports, be sure to read them and not save till later!

Sometimes I wonder at this internet stuff!

Leanne1812

I've read both articles.

The first is quite difficult to follow. So many factions & organisations involved. Who stands with who and who is the enemy of who is mind boggling.

The second states that IS came to the fore of western governments attention in the summer of 2014. Were they a faction of the rebels being armed by the west previously?

What was interesting is how sophisticated an organisation they are. Not just murdering psychopaths it seems. Funded by more than just oil too......makes me despair this conflict will be long & bloody

CLAPTON

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I've read both articles.

The first is quite difficult to follow. So many factions & organisations involved. Who stands with who and who is the enemy of who is mind boggling.

The second states that IS came to the fore of western governments attention in the summer of 2014. Were they a faction of the rebels being armed by the west previously?

What was interesting is how sophisticated an organisation they are. Not just murdering psychopaths it seems. Funded by more than just oil too......makes me despair this conflict will be long & bloody

ISIL are are a sunni wahhabi fanatical sect: many of their commanders are formally Saddam's people.
They were/ are funded by Saudi Arabia

No they weren't funded by Cameron or even Tony