[Closed] ISIS threatening Europe.

Where do jihadists go on holiday?

somewhere nice and Sunni

'Ere all week.

Aye, we have that awkward thing about not massacring civilians, it holds us back.

Don't worry, we're having a red tape bonfire and all those nasty H&S rules like not napalming women and children will soon be gone....

Pretty much sums it up..

Where do jihadists go on holiday?

somewhere nice and Sunni

Shia madness.

Problem is if they can reach Israel then all known nutters around that world that hate Israel will join forces including some middle eastern govts trying to be seen as "whiter than white".

Utter nonsense. Who is going to join with ISIS? Iraq? Syria? Iran? Who?

Well if ISIS and anyone else do get it together, I'd expect them to fall off in short order. Either that or their bearings will fail and the mission will grind to a halt.

[b][i]TAXI![/i][/b]

Where do jihadists go on holiday?
somewhere nice and Sunni

Shia madness.

Enough of the shi-ite jokes.

gobuchul - Member

Problem is if they can reach Israel then all known nutters around that world that hate Israel will join forces including some middle eastern govts trying to be seen as "whiter than white".

Utter nonsense. Who is going to join with ISIS? Iraq? Syria? Iran? Who?

By the time Isis reaches Israel I doubt they are much of Iraq or Syria left apart from pockets of former govt territories.

As for the nutters there are plenty about who are willing to help out directly or indirectly as they are from all over the world. I mean they will "rationality" justify their involvements. Nutters and ZMs they are ... 🙄

theotherjonv - Member
Enough of the shi-ite jokes.

Long time ago I pronounced it as "shite" to my friend from Iran but he took it well. My Jordanian friends however found it very funny and my Palestinian friend was grumpy ... the Jordanians said he was a grumpy person ... 😆

We really have gone through the looking glass when you consider that Iraq is now full of Iranian militias. But this is now apparently a good thing, as they're on 'our' side.

Not to be confused with Yemen, where the pro-Iranian militias are a bad thing and must be bombed by our friends the Saudis.

The Iranians think the US is funding and supplying ISIS. The Iranian militias are not 'our' friends.

ISIS were our friends when Assad was the bad guy, remember that?

you're not remembering things right. once upon a time there were moderate revolutionaries but they got stomped by the islamists

That article I posted earlier in the thread suggests grum may have a point...

Whether that has any bearing on Jihadi John not being apprehended by MI5 remains to be seen

Somebody is funding and supplying ISIS.

you're not remembering things right. once upon a time there were moderate revolutionaries but they got stomped by the islamists

Well I was being slightly facetious, but we were funding/arming the revolutionaries allied to ISIS.

aaaaaaaaaam - Member
you're not remembering things right. once upon a time there were moderate revolutionaries but they got stomped by the islamists

they didnt all get stomped on, a lot have moved over to ISIS

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/23/us-air-strikes-syra-driving-anti-assad-groups-support-isis

[i]Why haven't ISIS seen fit to attack Israel?
To quote Yamamoto "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."

Israel don't mess about and Isis don't have the capacity to fight them.[/i]

And here's me thinking it was because their American paymasters had told them not to.

Isn't Saudi Arabia the paymaster for ISIS? Isn't it the usual Sunni/Shia merry go round?

What this needs is conciliation by way of a charity single, like "I got you babe" by Sunni and Shia....

Somebody is funding and supplying ISIS.

Despite funding the promotion of a lot of the more extreme versions of Islam that ISIS support, I'm not sure the Saudis are too keen on ISIS. Think they are afraid it could all get out of hand and destabilise their country.

I heard recently that the key architects of IS are not religious fanatics at all by the way. Will try and find links tomorrow.

I think some people might be under the impression that ISIS are just a bunch of terrorists who don't do much beyond just murdering people. They are the rulers in about a quarter of Syria and Iraq. The area they control is more or less a functioning state. They receive revenue in much the same way as other rulers/governments do, eg, through taxation.

This is the legacy of failed Western foreign policy :

[img] [/img]

It represents a sizable country.

This is the legacy of failed Western foreign policy

I agree, but it's not clear to me that we deserve [u]quite[/u] as much of the credit for this shambles as we're taking.

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/robert-fisk-who-is-bombing-whom-in-the-middle-east-10222938.html ]Robert Fisk[/url]'s summary of the current war:

The Saudis are bombing Yemen because they fear the Shia Houthis are working for the Iranians. The Saudis are also bombing Isis in Iraq and the Isis in Syria. So are the United Arab Emirates. The Syrian government is bombing its enemies in Syria and the Iraqi government is also bombing its enemies in Iraq. America, France, Britain, Denmark, Holland, Australia and – believe it or not – Canada are bombing Isis in Syria and Isis in Iraq, partly on behalf of the Iraqi government (for which read Shia militias) but absolutely not on behalf of the Syrian government.

The Jordanians and Saudis and Bahrainis are also bombing Isis in Syria and Iraq because they don’t like them, but the Jordanians are bombing Isis even more than the Saudis after their pilot-prisoner was burned to death in a cage. The Egyptians are bombing parts of Libya because a group of Christian Egyptians had their heads chopped off by what might – notionally – be the same so-called Islamic State, as Isis refers to itself. The Iranians have acknowledged bombing Isis in Iraq – of which the Americans (but not the Iraqi government) take a rather dim view. And of course the Israelis have several times bombed Syrian government forces in Syria but not Isis (an interesting choice, we’d all agree).

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and UAE especially seem to have been spending huge amounts of public and private money on lots and lots of war. Presumably there would have come a point when these very wealthy countries with substantial militaries would have started to be more influential, even without the disastrous attempt to re-shape the region that the US kicked off in 2003.

[i]Israel would smash them with conventional forces.[/i]

There's scant evidence that the IDF is any better than any other army at fighting non conventional forces.

besides, IS is controlled by ex Iraqi military commanders, why would they bother with Israel?

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and UAE especially seem to have been spending huge amounts of public and private money on lots and lots of war. Presumably there would have come a point when these very wealthy countries with substantial militaries would have started to be more influential, even without the disastrous attempt to re-shape the region that the US kicked off in 2003.

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and UAE, all have regimes dependent on the West for their survival, the situation in the whole region has been shaped by Western foreign policy.

The West can indeed take credit for the mess.

A mess created through greed and self-interest with scant regard for the people affected.

This:

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and UAE, all have regimes dependent on the West for their survival, the situation in the whole region has been shaped by Western foreign policy.

The West can indeed take credit for the mess.

A mess created through greed and self-interest with scant regard for the people affected.

To expand slightly, we have to take into account that Saudi Arabia is consistently among the top customers for the UK Arms industry, with Prince Charles and Prince Andrew often involved in negotiations and brokering deals (similarly for Bahrain and UAE)

They have been long time collaborators with MI5/6 and the CIA in covert operations such as Operation Cyclone and many others besides.

Their role in 9/11 and ties to The Carlyle Group and the Bush Family are the subject of continued investigation.

The area they control is more or less a functioning state. They receive revenue in much the same way as other rulers/governments do, eg, through taxation.

That being the case, we have to ask who is continuing to supply weapons and ammunition and why embargos on weapons supply are lacking.

Furthermore, we have to ask who is continuing to trade with ISIS in the commodities they provide...

downshep - Member
What this needs is conciliation by way of a charity single, like "I got you babe" by Sunni and Shia....

OUTSTANDING!! 😆

@ernie - most of the land on your map is desert, it's not controlled by anyone. What ISIS controls are a few key cities and the roads between them. The West did fail in Iraq in some regards mainly as a result of pulling out too soon, the Iraqis where not ready to take over.

There's scant evidence that the IDF is any better than any other army at fighting non conventional forces.

besides, IS is controlled by ex Iraqi military commanders, why would they bother with Israel?

IS is bothered by Israel in that the country is full of Jews who they would very much like to eradicate. Look at all the examples of returning IS fighters and sympathizers who attack Jews in Europe (eg Denmark, France, Belgium)

Here is a map of their long term goal - note no Israel or Spain;

[img] [/img]

All that black would look a bit dour and rubbish on an atlas or a globe so I'm dead against it.

They're going to run into serious trouble if they try to ban jamón in Spain.

That being the case, we have to ask who is continuing to supply weapons and ammunition and why embargos on weapons supply are lacking.

Furthermore, we have to ask who is continuing to trade with ISIS in the commodities they provide...

As always, there seems to be a reasonably straightforward answer: US-led airstrikes have heavily targeted their ability to produce oil, with some success. However, much of their export is smuggled across the desert and mixed with legit supplies. No-one has a contract to buy islamic state oil.

Weapons sales are embargo'ed, obviously. However, (i) they overran so many units of the (US-supplied) Iraqi army that they did pretty nicely for themselves gun-wise, (ii) some arms were clearly provided to groups in Syria who were hoped to be less insane and have ended up with the very insane people and (iii) arms move fairly freely around the middle east anyway. At one stage every household in Iraq had an AK47 - there are probably enough basic assault rifles and ammunition available to keep up light mayhem for years without needing any very sophisticated re-supply.

[url= http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/23/us-mideast-crisis-sanctions-idUSKCN0IC1P620141023 ]"We have no silver bullet, no secret weapon to empty ISIL’s coffers overnight,"[/url]

Of all of the things to assume is a conspiracy, this mess is way out there. There was a conspiracy already, as we all recall: the US and UK greatly over-egged the case for invading Iraq in 2003 and tried to instal a reasonably sympathetic client government. They failed utterly and Iraq is now collapsing in a war between a largely Iranian-sympathetic government and an out-of-control islamic fundamentalist horror-show. No-one planned this, and it's very far from clear that anyone is benefitting.

No-one has a contract to buy islamic state oil.

Oil companies don't give a crap, they keep a few dodgy tankers off the coast of Africa to buy back the crude the locals/ pirates steal from pipelines and tankers

As for arms sales, we sold over £1m of arms to the Libyan government after gafaffi fell, I imagine a lot of that is now in IS hands
And Cameron was in the middle east when the Arab Spring started, was he promoting peace, democracy and goodwill, was he fk, he was there with a brigade of UK arms dealers pumping ever more weapons into the hands of our preferred dictators

All that black would look a bit dour and rubbish on an atlas or a globe so I'm dead against it.

too right. British Empire red was much better...
[img] /revision/latest?cb=20081130003125[/img]

too right. British Empire red was much better...

The mess the coalition made in Iraq and the missed opportunities where touched on in these excellent interviews with Emma Sky on Newsnight (episode also contains an interview with Sharon on a two state solution in Israel) and on LBC yesterday and some excellent insight into Sunni / Shia issues in Iraq. She was a special advisor to the US military in Iraq. I've just bought her book

[url= http://www.iaindale.com/posts/2015/05/19/watch-emma-sky-on-iraq-syria-why-we-ve-got-it-so-wrong ]LBC Radio Interview[/url]

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05w96jz/newsnight-18052015 ]Newsnight inc Emma Sky interview[/url]

She is quite critical of Obama's single minded desire "just to get out" also of the way in which the war/invasion was waged. She points out the Iraqi military outnumbered ISIS by 100:1 but endemic corruption meant they had no desire to actually fight anyone.

[img] [/img]

According to that map they want Austria, a country that lives entirely on pork.

According to that map they want Austria, a country that lives entirely on pork.

Trying to show them the error of their ways?

@ernie - most of the land on your map is desert, it's not controlled by anyone.

I suggest you read this article about life in ISIS controlled territory :

[url= http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b2c6b5ca-9427-11e4-82c7-00144feabdc0.html ]The Isis economy: Meet the new boss[/url]

[i]"Signs of discontent are evident across the ‘caliphate’ as people tire of its taxes, price caps and shoddy services" [/i]

As for the claim that ISIS controls mostly desert and nothing much more according to the chief of staff of the Kurdish President ISIS rules over [i]"a population of between 10 and 12 million"[/i]

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/war-with-isis-islamic-militants-have-army-of-200000-claims-kurdish-leader-9863418.htm ]War with Isis: Islamic militants have army of 200,000, claims senior Kurdish leader[/url]

Even if you take this as a gross exaggeration and half the figure it still represents many millions. Just the combined populations of Aleppo, Mosul, and Falluja, amounts to several millions.

The great IDF. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/04/israeli-soldiers-cast-doubt-on-legality-of-gaza-military-operation

I'm not disputing numbers @ernie, we are both speaking of the same thing. The people live in the cities.

You were claiming that the area is mostly desert not controlled by anyone. It's clear that ISIS controls a vast area and rules over a population of several millions.

Yes people live in cities, including in the UK.

This sort of map is more representative. You take one or two major cities and your map changes dramatically. Nobody controls the desert, you could land a helicopter there and do as you please.

[img] [/img]

The great IDF. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/04/israeli-soldiers-cast-doubt-on-legality-of-gaza-military-operation

I'm not sure I believe that report.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio#Iraq_War

However, overall, figures by the Iraq Body Count from 20 March 2003 to 14 March 2013 indicate that of 174,000 casualties only 39,900 were combatants, resulting in a civilian casualty rate of 77%

Now lets look up the statistics for the Gaza war.

Gaza Health Ministry: 2,310 killed[22] (70% civilians),[23] 10,626 wounded[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict

Le shock horror, we and just about everyone else that takes part in modern conflicts are as evil as the Iraelis.

So what's your point Tom that had Israel actually cared less civilians would have died ?

My points would be

1) Take the article with a pinch of salt.

2) Forgetting the whole settler issue for a moment. Why do the IDF get roundly shitted on by westerners for blowing civilians up, when we're just as bad. Stones, glass houses etc.

Fair enough Tom but I don't see anyone blowing the trumpet for The British Or American forces. In fact ime sure some people are saying their too soft.

We've been round this argument before on other threads.

Israel did far more to avoid civilian casualties in Gaza than the coalition did in Iraq.

In prior conflicts in Israel in the years after them the Palestinians admit the portion of civilian casualties is much lower than they originally claimed. Something like 65% of the casualties in Gaza where men of fighting age, Israel claims more than 50% of the overall total where militants/terrorists vs figure of approx 25% claimed by Hamas.

In the D-Day landings allied "friendly fire" killed 15,000 French civilians

Fair enough Tom but I don't see anyone blowing the trumpet for The British Or American forces. In fact ime sure some people are saying their too soft.

Our problem is that we cannot use legitimate force anymore after the Iraq debacle. We overthrew Saddam illegally at the behest of our own population, however this is not the greatest tragedy. What was is that we failed to rebuild the country and then we failed in our duty to stay long enough to secure the country. All those civilians and soldiers died for nothing, hundreds of thousands of lives pissed up the wall.

We're too soft in that we don't see objectives through to the end, changing ROI so we could cluster bomb people wouldn't have helped us in Iraq. Commitment would have done.

I think the general consensus is that the Iraq War was an unjustified war which resulted in horrific and totally unacceptable lose of life, why you think this justifies Israel's behavour isn't clear.

And of course the big difference between Gaza and Iraq is that there is overwhelming evidence that the Israeli attack on Gaza was a turkey shoot against essentially an unarmed people in which civilians were very deliberately targeted, the evidence that the strategy in Iraq was to similarly deliberately target unarmed civilians is somewhat thinner.

Gaza was a turkey shoot against essentially an unarmed people in which civilians were very deliberately targeted, the evidence that the strategy in Iraq was to similarly deliberately target unarmed civilians is somewhat thinner.

Numbers speak, rhetoric doesn't. We were just as careless in Iraq.

The civilian casualty ratio comes from a Gazan health ministry - unlikely to underestimate the civilian ratio.

We overthrew Saddam illegally at the behest of our own population,

Tom does have a valid point as regards lives lost in both Iraq and Gaza...

However, as always there is a bigger picture and aside from the indoctrinated military culture which the Israeli government tries to impose on its citizens, part of the reason Israel faces such criticism is the conditions Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank are forced to live in.

That said, we should also be mindful of the polluting legacy of war in Iraq and resulting birth defects, which will only stir further resentment and tension against the west.

10 seconds on Iraq body count shows that the 'coalition' forces contribution about 10% of total civilian casualties, with the bulk either being anti gov forces or unknown. So yeah, they are a bit more careful than the IDF.

Agreed Tom but you can't honestly say Saddam was overthrown at the behest of the population of this country.

Really, where?

Colonel Richard Kemp, former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan and adamant supporter of the IDF, spoke in 2011 about Israeli operations in the Gaza War. He said that a study published by the United Nations showed "that the ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in Gaza was by far the lowest in any asymmetric conflict in the history of warfare." He stated that this ratio was less than 1:1, and compared it favorably to the estimated ratios in NATO operations in [b]Afghanistan (3:1), western campaigns in Iraq and Kosovo (believed to be 4:1),[/b] and the conflicts in Chechnya and Serbia (much higher than 4:1, according to anecdotal evidence).

4 civilians for every combatant isn't good.

However, as always there is a bigger picture and aside from the indoctrinated military culture which the Israeli government tries to impose on its citizens, part of the reason Israel faces such criticism is the conditions Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank are forced to live in.

+1

The Iraelis don't help themselves at all.

Those figures are for 'killed in the conflict' not killed by one side or the other. The figures from IBC give around 27,000 insurgents killed by coalition and iraqi forces vs 18,000 civilian deaths caused by them. so 'better' than 1:1 (3:2ish) against 1:1 in the gaza conflict.

This is the most important part of the passage:

[b]adamant supporter of the IDF, spoke in 2011[/b] about Israeli operations in the Gaza War

27,000 is the total number of insurgents killed. Not the number killed by US led forces, I'm pretty sure Shia/Sunni fighting added to that number. Then there is the issue of iraqi insurgent kills being vastly over-inflated by coalition forces and civilian deaths failing to be reported.

Our policies (eg disbanding the Iraqi military) that led to so many civilians being blown up by insurgents, were not that much better than Israeli policy anyway. Our policies showed a lack of care and thought for the civilians of Iraq.

I should also imagine that if we broke down the casualty data to time periods that represented the initial invasion, a condition that more closely represents the 2014 Gaza conflict, the numbers would be fairly similar.

Before we the British public make ourselves feel good by critiquing the Israelis, we should stop to think what we owe the people of Iraq. How can our criticism of Israel be taken seriously on the world stage when we are so responsible for what is now happening in Iraq?

I'm not sure why the thread has been sidetracked onto the subject of how nice Israel is. Predictably Zionists such as Tom_W1987 and jambalaya will come to the defence of the Zionist state repeating Israeli propaganda (Israeli propaganda is among the most sophisticated in the world - a hell of a lot of time and effort goes into it) while equally predictably anti-Zionists like myself will denounce the Zionist state.

The interesting thing is that while Western governments tend (for geopolitical reasons) to be highly sympathetic towards Israel; and Israeli politicians, government officials, spokesmen, etc, are afforded huge media coverage to a level that Palestinians can only dream of, global opinion is actually very hostile towards Israel.

[url= http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/bbc-poll-israel-among-world-s-least-popular-nations-1.525890 ]Israel among world's least popular nations[/url]

Of course Zionists will claim that this simply represents global anti-Semitic feelings, as they always do. But there is little doubt that the real reason is that despite Israel's highly sophisticated propaganda machine and the huge support it gets from Western governments, people across the world see Israel's behaviour as reprehensible and utterly deplorable.

Fair enough. Not making the moral argument just questioning the numbers. Invasion figure are actually better but US only, not IBC or another independent i could find.

Fair enough. Not making the moral argument just questioning the numbers. Invasion figure are actually better but US only, not IBC or another independent i could find.

Yup, initial invasion appears to be 2:1 combatant to civilian, so you're right there.

Afghanistan appears to be a bit of a different story though, with wildly fluctuating estimates of causalities.

I'm not sure why the thread has been sidetracked onto the subject of how nice Israel is. Predictably Zionists such as Tom_W1987 and jambalaya will come to the defence of the Zionist state repeating Israeli propaganda (Israeli propaganda is among the most sophisticated in the world - a hell of a lot of time and effort goes into it) while equally predictably anti-Zionists like myself will denounce the Zionist state.

The interesting thing is that while Western governments tend (for geopolitical reasons) to be highly sympathetic towards Israel; and Israeli politicians, government officials, spokesmen, etc, are afforded huge media coverage to a level that Palestinians can only dream of, global opinion is actually very hostile towards Israel.

Poll seems biased towards white countries, seeing as South Korea is listed one point above South Africa. And by most/least popular country in the world, it means within mostly White or Latin American countries.

You also failed to read my previous post, anti-zionists like yourself are never going to get Israelis to change due to some of the issues that I've touched on.

The Palestinians in Gaza weren't forced to live in in the conditions they face today, they chose it. Israel withdrew, it was only upon the election of Hamas into a position of control with their stated aim of destroying Israel that the wall went up and the borders tightly controlled. Its not just Israel either. Egypt has been clearing a 1000 meter zone on the border, ie knocking down houses in order to disrupt the smuggling tunnel networks. The closing of the Egypt / Gaza border has been much more of an issue for Gazans than the restricted Israeli borders.

As I have posted before the wall went up around Jerusalem as a result of repeated suicide bombers attacking buses and other targets.

Palestinians cannot expect to live openly and freely if they persist in trying to attack Israel. That handshake on the lawn of the White House between Rabin and Arafat was more than 20 years ago. Hamas rejected that and every other peace initiative, even Abbas's position doesn't square with it. As long as that remains the case the Palestinians will live in miserable conditions.

Most of the civilians killed in Iraq have died as a result of sectarian Sunni vs Shia violence including numerous suicide bombings. IS is part of this too.

The thread has started talking about Israel as the country was highlighted as a likely target of IS in the future.

@ernie I see ****stan and Iran are less popular.

So yeah, they are a bit more careful than the IDF.

Palestinians cannot expect to live openly and freely if they persist in trying to attack Israel.

Blaming the victim as ever. The Palestinians have NEVER been allowed to live in peace and the recent atrocity was preceded by a long period of truce on the Hamas side which was ended by the Israelis.

Bringing the thread back on topic, the founder of [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SITE_Intelligence_Group ]SITE intelligence[/url] (who provided the photos in the article at the start of the thread and even managed to release the Stephen Sotloff video before ISIS), Rita Katz is a Zionist who has spent much of her life in Israel.

Also notable are SITE intelligence's ties to the [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAND_Corporation ]RAND Corporation[/url]...

The Palestinians aren't why we're struggling to comprehend the brutality and complexity of IS right now, neither is Israel.

The conflict has morphed since the 1970s, I hate to say "I told you so", but the problem has been stoked by the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the failure to guarantee civilian lives since.

A huge part of this has been the disruption thanks to conflicts. IS can appeal to poorly educated, disaffected youths from all over the region. The lack of education, jobs and the destruction of infrastructure have all played into the hands of a nihilistic few.

It's not rocket science. IS have made some massive tactical blunders, their whole cultural ethos has resulted in a brain drain of intellectuals, civil servants and intelligentsia to the point that only the most deluded would ever consider life in the IS in any way appealing.

The Palestinians have NEVER been allowed to live in peace and the recent atrocity was preceded by a long period of truce on the Hamas side which was ended by the Israelis.

Hamas fired some 450 rockets at Isreal over the 6 months from Jan to July 2014 and then orchestrated the kidnap and murder of the 3 kids travelling back from their religious school lessons . They knew this would provoke a response which is why they invited journalists into Gaza to witness the "aggression" from July onwards

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/19/israel-faces-fifa-suspension-after-claims-it-discriminates-against-palestinians
The levels to which Israel will stoop is matched only by the levels you stoop in blaming the victims . Its really is shameful.

I shall come round your house and steal your land and assets, give you and your family just enough food to not starve whilst controlling all you access to everything. Obviously if you get a bit shouty or fighty about this you will be the baddy and I will have no choice but to use massive and overwhelming force to teach you right from wrong. Dont blame me you made me do it ...why cann you not live side by side in peace with me...is that too much to ask .....well is it ?

That is what you and your fellow zionists are trying to defend.
Shame on you and history will judge you as it judged those who supported South Africa.

Why do Israeli airstrikes target Syrian government sites, but not ISIS?

The Syrian civil war is a godsend to Israel and her Western allies, as long as both sides keep killing each other with no one side winning then what's not to like. That's why they are happy to fan the flames of war while making certain that one side doesn't get an advantage.

jambalaya - Member

Hamas fired some 450 rockets at Isreal over the 6 months from Jan to July 2014 [citation needed]

🙄

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2014#Summary ]List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2014[/url]

Palestinians aren't why we're struggling to comprehend the brutality and complexity of IS right now, neither is Israel.

Hamas fired some 450 rockets at Isreal over the 6 months from Jan to July 2014 and then orchestrated the kidnap and murder of the 3 kids travelling back from their religious school lessons . They knew this would provoke a response which is why they invited journalists into Gaza to witness the "aggression" from July onwards

More horrible lies, as you are well aware. There has never been proof that Hamas were responsible for the kidnapping. The whole event was a pretext for Israel to target the unity government, with phony accusations justifying the arrest and murder of Hamas leaders.

@lifer - I believe jamba is quoting the IDF statistics, for what they are worth (I.e. nothing). However, it is instructive that he does so, since it underlines his role as a purveyor of Zionist propaganda.

There has never been proof that Hamas were responsible for the kidnapping.

As for the rocket stats you will have heard Cameron say numerous time that Israel has a right to defend itself against rocket attacks, he is referring to the attacks which took place from Jan-June 2014.

Palestine does not form a rallying call whatsoever for ISIS. ISIS is no supporter of the Palestinians in fact they believe they are as guilty as the Westerners for trying to line their own pockets and to have power by democratic means. ISIS do not believe in any of that. Palastinians do not want to live in a Caliphate under strict Islamic law. The Palestinians in Syria (eg in Aleppo) have fought with the FSA against ISIS. In Gaza the ISIS supporting factions/offshoots are in the minority and are subject to brutal violence from Hamas, they don't want to be threatened.

ISIS's rallying cry comes from Sunni vs Shia sectarian differences

you will have heard Cameron say numerous time that Israel has a right to defend itself against rocket attacks

Appeal to authority

Jambalaya is right though, the IDF have really taken lot of care to protect civilian lives. I mean, look at the impact of their targeted surgical strikes in Gaza.

Oh, and:

EIRUT: The Israeli Police Foreign Press Spokesman, Micky Rosenfeld, appears to have falsified the Israeli government’s claim that Hamas was responsible for the killing of three Israeli settler teens in June, by saying responsibility lies with a lone cell that operated without the complicity of Hamas’ leadership.

The quote from the Hamas guy doesn't actually contradict that. But don't let me stop you regurgitating Israeli propagada

Like one large concentration camp/ ghetto...so sad that after centuries of awful treatment they should then do this to other people.

It says a lot about what it is to be human and not in a good way.

Shame on the zionists and their apologists

Strange how morals are so malleable:

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Like one large concentration camp/ ghetto...so sad that after centuries of awful treatment they should then do this to other people.

@grum if you spend $100m building tunnels under residential areas and you wage a street war in residential areas that's how its going to look. That's what large parts of Syria look like now too.