Bombing Syria

IMO it's going to be a waste of time(and money), since the bombing has started IS have said they don't travel in big convoys anymore because of this.

A Tornado flight costs £35,000 per hour. One Brimstone missile costs £105,000

So to blow up a couple of trucks Costs over £250,000

Money well spent...?

I am totally against bombing IS in Syria it serves no purpose and will only result in the death of many innocent civilians.

If the west and Russia are serious about the growth of IS then they have to cut off the funds that they are receiving for the oil they sell on the black market.I understand Turkey buy oil from IS so straight away Turkey should be threatened with losing their place in NATO and the UN.

Secondly the radicalisation of Muslims is taking place in thousands of Mosques throughout Europe and America, this has to stop and surveillance has to be allowed in many if not all Mosques.Any Imans that refuse to co operate should be threatened with the closure of their Mosque.It`s about time the politicians and the Islam apologists woke up to the fact that ISIS is Islams problem they follow the written word in the Koran to the letter and every member of ISIS is a Muslim.

Until we stop treating muslims with kid gloves while treading on eggshells as to not offend them nothing will change and the radicals within their demonic religion will get stronger and stronger.

The UK government are at one with the USA in trying to get Assad out. At the same time they want to bomb ISIS (and many civilians) in Syria. Assad wants to get ISIS out of Syria. So we are trying to beat both regimes in Syria at the same time. So we make enemies on all sides.

The pragmatic Russians have no such claims to the moral high ground. Assad might be a nasty piece of work, but he and his supporters are not sending their suicide bombers and gunmen around the world to kill anyone who dares to disagree with them.

But what does bombing achieve? You hit a few key targets, and a few hundred innocent people. You then create more hatred for the West and more martyrs.

It's not a religious led problem though, its an oil led one.

That's the reason we are joining in.

You don't fight terrorism or ideology with bombs.

Anyone know what our first target was?

Answers on a postcard....

I agree with what you're saying to an extent. My objection to the bombing is based on how I believe the government will approach it as opposed to how they should approach it.

What will happen is that we will commit a few aircraft to the mission, something like 10 or 12. There will be a few videos of the bombing runs shown on the news, but in reality, they will achieve very little.

If the UK goes to war, it should do just that, go to war. In conjunction with the French, US, Russians or anyone else involved we should be committing the vast majority of our Air Force, Navy and Army to the mission. The war should be brutal, swift and overpowering. All the Nations involved should send everything they've got available. However, Syria is a different ball-game.

Just who should we be fighting, who should we be helping? ISIS are fighting Assad, they are fighting the Free Syria Army and they are fighting AQ. The Free Syrians are fighting Assad. The Kurds are fighting anyone who threatens them, including a NATO ally (Turkey) but that same NATO ally is supporting ISIS. It's a clusterfack, and no matter what we do we'll just upset someone else.

I agree with your assessment regarding 'increased vulnerability' because it doesn't matter what we do (bomb or not) they are coming for us. More attention needs to be paid towards home security. How many extremists are on the Watch List in the UK? Well, we all know the Watch List is nonsense as in practically every terrorist attack in Europe over the last few years it has emerged afterwards that some of them were on the known Watch List. Why not just pick then all up, fly them to Turkey, and release them over the border into Syria? Jobs jobbed.

The real issues with so called modern warfare is allowing the press access, just think back to vietnam, press coverage turn't a very large part of america against the forces, As if a soldier farts in the wrong place it gets reported, Ban the press send in special forces get the job done the press propaganda machine needs shutting down.

The real trouble is to beat these people you need to fight fire with fire, so the geneva convention needs to be ignored as they haven't signed it.

Yes this time the oil was important as it was an isis fundraiser, so needed destroying . As for turkey chuck em out of nato as what's the point of having an ally if they are funding the enemy(think france supplying the argies,will never forget or forgive).

There is no easy answer , nobby has the right answer almost, the trouble is all the so called do gooders will say oh you cant deport people, rather than send them to syria ,round em all up and drop em off in russia, im sure putin will know how to deal with em all.

My real feeling is we should just carpet bomb the whole area make it dresden the second, i also feel every muslim in nato countries should be interned until isis are destroyed, maybe just maybe they will then fight these groups rather turn a blind eye as they do now.

Whilst the bombing isn't all that vague, we're now in phase one. Easy targets that cost them revenue (and therefore control/power). I would be very surprised if there are not special forces already on the ground identifying targets (ie individuals) ready to 'paint' them for the bombers above. With all due respect to the US Marines, British SAS, best in the world...


...and as for the body count, it depends if you would chose 130 soldiers coming home from the middle-east in body bags, or 130 civilians in central London being killed. And I'm aware the arguments are much more complicated than that, but the problem is that this argument can't be made in the media but it's still a valid question. Would you bet one against the other...? It's a horrible and stupid question, but sooner or later everyone against action has to pick a side and explain their reasons...

I get the Blitzkrieg approach, hit hard and fast but there are innocents involved in that sort of thing. I know 'they' have shown a total lack of regard for that but we're better than that aren't we?

Could we also go side by side with Italy, France, Russia, US etc?

I guess this is the first of many stages, but it's going to be messy no matter what.

I'm an avid watcher of WW2 documentaries, and when you hear of some of these Guys stories, it makes you wonder. And there was none of this combat fatigue and sent back to recover after 6 months, this lot were away from home, under fire, for years.

This is the start of a very nasty war. For everyone.