Greece & ISIS - next few weeks looking dodgy

[Guest]

some info

'86bn total bailout'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33602003

[tobyjugg2]

some info

'86bn total bailout'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33602003

 

Thats not the total bailout figure Ford, thats just the latest.

Not entirely sure of the ins and outs and if anything other than interest has been paid but its over 240bn total.

[Conniff]

There VAT has just risen 10%

[tobyjugg2]

There VAT has just risen 10%

 

Too true, but as so few paid even the lower amounts, I have major doubts regarding any positive effect on anything at all.

[Guest]

greek govt passes latest round of reforms re bailout.

that ex finance minister votes for, despite his prev comments.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33631751

[tobyjugg2]

Isis

Cameron is looking to get parliamentary approval for strikes in Syria, despite approval being rejected in a prior parliamentary vote, and Cameron ignoring this and sending some british pilots on strikes in Syria with the US forces.

 

Not sure what has changed here regarding Syria, or whether this is being done in conjunction with Camerons prior mortal enemy, Assad - the official government in Syria whatever Israel/UK/US claims, who is also fighting ISIS.

 

It will be interesting, and undoubtedly deeply disturbing, to see how this is all played.

[unclebulgaria67]

The strategy must be to try to control the number of ISIS fighters and their equipment. You cannot destroy them all and win the battle, but you can try to stop them gaining in numbers.

 

The big problem with the strategy is that ISIS has spread out across the region. There are reports they have joined up with other terrorist organisations. The US will deploy drones to anywhere in the world, but the UK cannot do this.

 

What are the Arab League and African Nations doing to deal with the situation. More pressure needs to be applied to countries in the region to come to joint agreements on strategy. We don't want western countries fighting wars on behalf of others, which are partly to do with religious differences going back thousands of years.

[tobyjugg2]

Does anyone think the rhetoric of the official reports sounds true. I'm not talking conspiracy nonsense here but:

 

How can they report ISIS has 10's thousands of men in outright battles with Iraqi and Kurdish forces, yet they can't seriously impact them with air strikes

 

How can the news channels and reports say that ISIS has heavy artillery and TANKS in these battles, but that the high tech western planes can't find them and take them out even with the news channels showing the Kurds pointing and saying 'ISIS TANKS there' on the news channels?

 

Simply doesn't wash does it?

[Conniff]

Isis

Cameron is looking to get parliamentary approval for strikes in Syria, despite approval being rejected in a prior parliamentary vote, and Cameron ignoring this and sending some british pilots on strikes in Syria with the US forces.

 

Not sure what has changed here regarding Syria, or whether this is being done in conjunction with Camerons prior mortal enemy, Assad - the official government in Syria whatever Israel/UK/US claims, who is also fighting ISIS.

 

It will be interesting, and undoubtedly deeply disturbing, to see how this is all played.

 

You are wrong in the 'attached' pilots to the US. They are completely under the control of the US military and not the UK. The same as the US personal that were in the 'attached' swop are under the control of the UK military.

This was 'not' Cameron sending them to Syria. If the pilots had refused, they would have been disciplined for deliberately disobeying a lawful order.

[tobyjugg2]

You are wrong in the 'attached' pilots to the US. They are completely under the control of the US military and not the UK. The same as the US personal that were in the 'attached' swop are under the control of the UK military.

This was 'not' Cameron sending them to Syria. If the pilots had refused, they would have been disciplined for deliberately disobeying a lawful order.

 

Conniff, As has been widely reported, including in the prior linked news articles here, many countries have other countries forces embedded within their ranks, but none get involved in actions which are not approved by their own governments, and certainly DON'T get involved in actions where their own governments have voted against action.

They should have sat the Syria raids out and only performed in the Parliament approved Iraq operations, and would have without UK command approval.

[unclebulgaria67]

Conniff, As has been widely reported, including in the prior linked news articles here, many countries have other countries forces embedded within their ranks, but none get involved in actions which are not approved by their own governments, and certainly DON'T get involved in actions where their own governments have voted against action.

They should have sat the Syria raids out and only performed in the Parliament approved Iraq operations, and would have without UK command approval.

 

Not sure of the legal situation re UK service personnel taking part in actions not sanctioned by UK parliament or covered by UK agreements under international law. But i guess that the Prime Minister can authorise ministers to allow UK service personnel to take part in actions under the command of foreign allied forces. I believe under NATO there are agreements in place that cover the situation. that attached foreign forces come under the command of the unit they are with.

[Conniff]

Ok, knowall, I know more about this than you, so take my word for it.

[unclebulgaria67]

Ok, knowall, I know more about this than you, so take my word for it.

 

I am not sure anyone does. I have heard international legal experts arguing about this before. If a UK pilot in a US jet fighter or piloting a US drone kills 100 civilians in a Syrian marketplace, who is legally responsible. The answer has to be the US chain of command, as the pilot is operating under the command of his or her superior officer.

[tobyjugg2]

Ok, knowall, I know more about this than you, so take my word for it.

That does seem highly unlikely in the 2nd part, and unwarranted in the 3rd.

 

I think just part of unclebulgarias post says all that is needed:

 

UK service personnel taking part in actions not sanctioned by UK parliament or covered by UK agreements under international law.

 

If that isn't enough

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/17/mps-demand-commons-statement-over-uk-military-action-in-syria

"Tom Watson, one of the Labour MPs to have tabled a succession of questions on the scale of UK involvement in Syria, accused the government of sophistry. “It now appears the government has misled MPs and withheld from the House of Commons that the government is involved in military action in Syria that was expressly forbidden by parliament. That is a very serious matter.”"

 

Definition: sophistry - the use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.

 

 

and even more, in even more countries

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/national/23-Jul-2015/british-air-force-may-be-illegally-striking-pakistan-yemen

 

"According to the channel, there may be legal issues if UK personnel were involved in strikes in countries like Pakistan and Yemen with whom the UK was not legally at war. Strikes on Syria would also be illegal given a 2013 parliamentary vote on bombing within the borders of the war-hit nation."

 

further from the same link

"It was later confirmed that each mission, reportedly carried out by the Royal Navy pilots operating from US aircraft carriers in the Gulf, received specific parliamentary authorisation. "

[unclebulgaria67]

The PM can authorise actions. Does not require parliament to authorise.

[tobyjugg2]

The PM can authorise actions. Does not require parliament to authorise.

 

Yes, and it does seem quite clear that Parliament at a whole was certainly NOT involved in these authorisations and were actually deliberately kept in the dark or perhaps even lied to by the few at the center of this

 

Here is a separate summary of some points to consider by the guardian

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/17/guardian-view-on-bombing-isis-in-syria-british-pilots

[san_d]

Ok, knowall, I know more about this than you, so take my word for it.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]58653[/ATTACH]

[tobyjugg2]

TURKEY MAKES AIRSTRIKES IN SYRIA

 

Well, what the Americans have been pressing for has happened.

 

NATO Turkey has long resisted this for many reasons, not the least of which was that the 'coalition' was arming Kurds, albeit with nothing significant weapons wise despite the Kurds regularly being touted as 'the front line' to ISIS.

 

Of particular interest is that the Turks have not just bombed ISIS forces, they have also bombed Kurdish forces.

 

Oh what a tangled web we weave.

[Conniff]

TURKEY MAKES AIRSTRIKES IN SYRIA

 

Well, what the Americans have been pressing for has happened.

 

NATO Turkey has long resisted this for many reasons, not the least of which was that the 'coalition' was arming Kurds, albeit with nothing significant weapons wise despite the Kurds regularly being touted as 'the front line' to ISIS.

 

Of particular interest is that the Turks have not just bombed ISIS forces, they have also bombed Kurdish forces.

 

Oh what a tangled web we weave.

 

Well that will rile toby who seems upset that the ratbags are being bombed at all.

[unclebulgaria67]

Well that will rile toby who seems upset that the ratbags are being bombed at all.

 

Come on you two. Discuss, not argue.

 

Did the Turkish airforce bomb Kurdish forces and if so why ?

 

Not sure i would believe all information coming out of the region. It is a very confusing war zone, with it being difficult to identify the different factions.

 

The question is where this is heading ? Can the terrorists be defeated by military actions ? Can peace be negotiated ? Will we end up with Iraq and Syria being split up with new countries formed ?

 

Why are the United Nations, Arab League and African Union in all of this ? There is no real world leadership any more, that can bring people together.

[Conniff]

To add to the discussion. this just goes to show how thick isis are. Now they have brought another country into the action against them.

[tobyjugg2]

Did the Turkish airforce bomb Kurdish forces and if so why ?

 

Not sure i would believe all information coming out of the region. It is a very confusing war zone, with it being difficult to identify the different factions.

 

The Kurdish 'issue' is like a microcosm of the entire region, particularly when considered alongside the Turks.

Its worth looking up and forming your own opinions if you are interested in the driving forces behind some of the issues in the region.

 

UK and American special forces/spooks have been working with Turkey (quite rightly politically as they are our ally) in rounding up Turk/Kurdish separatists in Turkey as Turkey starts air strikes. Terrorists to Turkey, Heroes to Kurds.

 

I can only assume that reports of Kurdish forces being a major front line ground force in the war against ISIS has been sold just to get Turkey involved, as they will likely be well peeved now.

 

As I said - Oh what a tangled web we weave.

[Guest]

an oldish (about 3yrs) article i prev posted elsewhere re turkey/syria

http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/public/Research/Middle%20East/1212bp_phillips.pdf

[unclebulgaria67]

I hope that the Earth is invaded by aliens looking to take it over. That would be the only thing that might unite the world.

 

If i won the lottery, i think i might emigrate to New Zealand. A country the size of the UK, with less than 10% of the population and not being so close to several wars going on. We have war going on in several countries which are only about 4 Hours by plane away from the UK. Turkey are getting involved, because the worry must be that war spreads. What happens if ISIS manage to get people involved in EU countries to carry out terrorist acts on a wide scale. Some of the migrants may have terrorist intent.

[tobyjugg2]

an oldish (about 3yrs) article i prev posted elsewhere re turkey/syria

http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/public/Research/Middle%20East/1212bp_phillips.pdf

 

Incredibly good summation you found there Ford. Thank You.