Islamic State crisis: Australia to send 600 troops to UAE

[Lite Beer]

Islamic State crisis: Australia to send 600 troops to UAE

Australia says it is sending 600 troops to the Middle East ahead of possible combat operations against Islamic State (IS) militants in Iraq.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott said the deployment, initially to the United Arab Emirates, was in response to a specific US request.

Nearly 40 countries, including 10 Arab states, have signed up to a US-led plan to tackle the extremist group.

France is hosting a regional security summit on Monday.

US Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Paris late on Saturday after a four-day tour of the Middle East trying to drum up support for action against IS.

Last week, US President Barack Obama presented a strategy to fight the group in both Iraq and Syria.

Speaking on Sunday, Prime Minister Abbott said Iraq had made it clear that it would "very much welcome" a military contribution to restore security.

Read More: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29195689

-- BBC 2014-09-14

[Publicus]

Good on Oz not only for committing forces to this important task, but for assigning to it as many as 600 troops and eight top of the line combat aircraft.

This broad and inclusive coalition of 40 nations takes the bite out of the hounds that accuse the United States of warmongering. The reality is that it's a dangerous and treacherous world and in the ME it can literally be a world of barbarians.

This from the OP is a good one that really misses the mark entirely and completely......

In taking a big jump ahead of international bodies, America seeks to emerge as a Hollywood-style hero battling a crisis of its own making," Admiral Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state news agency IRNA

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

[chooka]

Good on Oz not only for committing forces to this important task, but for assigning to it as many as 600 troops and eight top of the line combat aircraft.

This broad and inclusive coalition of 40 nations takes the bite out of the hounds that accuse the United States of warmongering. The reality is that it's a dangerous and treacherous world and in the ME it can literally be a world of barbarians.

This from the OP is a good one that really misses the mark entirely and completely......

In taking a big jump ahead of international bodies, America seeks to emerge as a Hollywood-style hero battling a crisis of its own making," Admiral Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state news agency IRNA

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

Australia has a tiny defence force compared to the U.S but is always one the first to stand shoulder to shoulder

[Lite Beer]

Australia commits 600 troops to anti-IS campaign

SYDNEY - Prime Minister Tony Abbott said Sunday Australia would deploy 600 troops to the United Arab Emirates to join the US-led international coalition gearing up for war against Islamic State jihadists.

Abbott’s announcement comes two days after Canberra lifted its terror alert level to "high" on growing concern about Australian jihadists returning from fighting in Iraq and Syria.

Abbott said the deployment of about "400 air personnel and about 200 military personnel" followed a formal request from Washington for Australia to contribute to the international coalition against the rampaging Islamist group.

He said Australia was "not deploying combat troops but contributing to international efforts to prevent the humanitarian crisis from deepening".

"There are obviously further decisions to be taken before Australian forces will be committed to combat operations in Iraq," Abbott told a press conference in Darwin.

"Nevertheless, Australia is prepared to engage in international operations to disrupt and degrade ISIL (IS) because of the threat that this murderous death cult poses not just to the people of Iraq, not just to the people of the Middle East, but to the whole world including to Australia."

The US has been working to forge a coalition against IS jihadists in Iraq and Syria, with Secretary of State John Kerry in the Middle East to shore up Arab support.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Australia-commits-600-troops-to-anti-IS-campaign-30243237.html

-- The Nation 2014-09-14

[Steely Dan]

Australia are one of the few Western nations who seem to have a clue about jihad (Canada is another). At this point things need to be put into perspective, the updated estimates of ISIS numbers are between 21,000 and 35,000. The US will still need to do most of the heavy lifting and as yet I see little sign of Obama being willing to put US boots on the ground in any meaningful numbers.

[arjunadawn]

This from the OP is a good one that really misses the mark entirely and completely......

In taking a big jump ahead of international bodies, America seeks to emerge as a Hollywood-style hero battling a crisis of its own making," Admiral Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state news agency IRNA

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

This is disingenuous. This issue is hardly as simple as you suggest. The black and white you suggest is evident no where in this actual problem; this situation is very nuanced. The IS fiasco needs to be addressed, as does global jihad, but lets not send more people to die without recognizing what is really going on. This is a false flag operation if there ever has been one. The sad thing, a response must be forthcoming.

Good for anyone who supports the need to eradicate this muslim jihad BS. The very thing that the US seeks to address is largely created by the US (and proxies in the region). Parodying those who oppose your view is a silly and transparent attempt to marginalize those who disagree with you. However, I dont bite. I know your incorrect.

History will record this entire debacle as one of blowback. This is a textbook example of unintended consequences. IS was created for a limited regional end. Unable to call up shia, they were left with sunni. Unable to amass respect of sunni since surrendering Iraq to the shia, the US had to create a proxy who's appeal transcended sectarian concerns, and IS was born- the "jihad card!"

[kinmaew]

Another reason why I have given up voting. Both sides of politics in AUS do nothing except as the US directs them to do. The wars in the middle east have achieved nothing in 14 years. They want an Islamic state let them have it and stay out of it, that's the way they operate over there and its up to the people themselves to change things for the better if they want it not with a heavy hand from the US and Co. The longer AUS and UK side with the US the WORSE its gonna get for all but you cant reason with politicians because they all report to the same boss. Why isn't Thailand over there? They love the US don't they? Jangwat 77?

And for the aid workers stay out. Step 1 - Your country is complicit in causing death and damage to these countries, Step 2 - Thinking of aid work? Stop step 1 first because they just dont mix as you cant be destroying the country on one hand and fixing it on the other it just dont make sense.

[Publicus]

This from the OP is a good one that really misses the mark entirely and completely......

In taking a big jump ahead of international bodies, America seeks to emerge as a Hollywood-style hero battling a crisis of its own making," Admiral Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state news agency IRNA

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

This is disingenuous. This issue is hardly as simple as you suggest. The black and white you suggest is evident no where in this actual problem; this situation is very nuanced. The IS fiasco needs to be addressed, as does global jihad, but lets not send more people to die without recognizing what is really going on. This is a false flag operation if there ever has been one. The sad thing, a response must be forthcoming.

Good for anyone who supports the need to eradicate this muslim jihad BS. The very thing that the US seeks to address is largely created by the US (and proxies in the region). Parodying those who oppose your view is a silly and transparent attempt to marginalize those who disagree with you. However, I dont bite. I know your incorrect.

History will record this entire debacle as one of blowback. This is a textbook example of unintended consequences. IS was created for a limited regional end. Unable to call up shia, they were left with sunni. Unable to amass respect of sunni since surrendering Iraq to the shia, the US had to create a proxy who's appeal transcended sectarian concerns, and IS was born- the "jihad card!"

'Presto' and now we have the "jihad card." Talk about glib and trite, superficial.

The Iranian admiral is a jerk making idiotic noises. That however doesn't make the situation in the ME simple, black and white, or a fiasco.

U.S. special forces, CIA and the like and German KSK Kommando units have been on the ground there for some time because ISIS is a threat not only to the immediate ME region but to the larger area that includes Europe and extends to Australia. Anyone who might think the situation in the ME or in any Old World backward area that specializes in lawlessness treachery and butchery is a simple one, or is black and white would be a blistering fool.

You haven't lived in an Old World country society and culture where yes means no and no means double yes and I dunno means watch your back?

[apiwan]

*Deleted post edited out*

. Before the beheadings.. Nobody wants to get involved in UK.

Now the government has the backing of the country.

And has for Cameron harping on about the danger of isis coming to the UK in force.

It's all scripted. And so many can not see it.

We gave saddam the gas to kill kurds.

Now we're arming them.

Assad may be a dictator. But the opposition does not bear thinking about.

[ggt]

Normally...I am skeptical of anything involving the US...but in this case...evil truly does describe the actions of the ISIS group...they are without limits when it comes to human carnage and destruction...may the coalition have quick success to thwart this insane groups threat to the region and the world...

[ggt]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So true

. Before the beheadings.. Nobody wants to get involved in UK.

Now the government has the backing of the country.

And has for Cameron harping on about the danger of isis coming to the UK in force.

It's all scripted. And so many can not see it.

We gave saddam the gas to kill kurds.

Now we're arming them.

Assad may be a dictator. But the opposition does not bear thinking about.

Gosh...do you think the UK gov't requested that ISIS behead one of its citizens so they could sway public opinion...since it is all scripted....?

[Seastallion]

This from the OP is a good one that really misses the mark entirely and completely......

In taking a big jump ahead of international bodies, America seeks to emerge as a Hollywood-style hero battling a crisis of its own making," Admiral Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state news agency IRNA

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

This is disingenuous. This issue is hardly as simple as you suggest. The black and white you suggest is evident no where in this actual problem; this situation is very nuanced. The IS fiasco needs to be addressed, as does global jihad, but lets not send more people to die without recognizing what is really going on. This is a false flag operation if there ever has been one. The sad thing, a response must be forthcoming.

Good for anyone who supports the need to eradicate this muslim jihad BS. The very thing that the US seeks to address is largely created by the US (and proxies in the region). Parodying those who oppose your view is a silly and transparent attempt to marginalize those who disagree with you. However, I dont bite. I know your incorrect.

History will record this entire debacle as one of blowback. This is a textbook example of unintended consequences. IS was created for a limited regional end. Unable to call up shia, they were left with sunni. Unable to amass respect of sunni since surrendering Iraq to the shia, the US had to create a proxy who's appeal transcended sectarian concerns, and IS was born- the "jihad card!"

We're probably on the same page...except for "unintended consequences". The jihadist momentum was a foregone conclusion, and thus should be more fairly seen as a "regrettable (but predicted) cost". It's the interest rate on that cost that is higher than expected.

I say that with reference to how Al Qaeda-affiliated groups were financed to assist in the overthrowing of Gaddaffi. The Free Syrian Army was no less affiliated.

Not to mention financing Mujahadin in Afghanistan .

The men and women that sit in secure meeting rooms making these plans are the true evil.

It's a pity and a shame that Aussies may die to try to repair America's manipulations in the ME.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies deleted.

[arjunadawn]

This from the OP is a good one that really misses the mark entirely and completely......

In taking a big jump ahead of international bodies, America seeks to emerge as a Hollywood-style hero battling a crisis of its own making," Admiral Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state news agency IRNA

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

This is disingenuous. This issue is hardly as simple as you suggest. The black and white you suggest is evident no where in this actual problem; this situation is very nuanced. The IS fiasco needs to be addressed, as does global jihad, but lets not send more people to die without recognizing what is really going on. This is a false flag operation if there ever has been one. The sad thing, a response must be forthcoming.

Good for anyone who supports the need to eradicate this muslim jihad BS. The very thing that the US seeks to address is largely created by the US (and proxies in the region). Parodying those who oppose your view is a silly and transparent attempt to marginalize those who disagree with you. However, I dont bite. I know your incorrect.

History will record this entire debacle as one of blowback. This is a textbook example of unintended consequences. IS was created for a limited regional end. Unable to call up shia, they were left with sunni. Unable to amass respect of sunni since surrendering Iraq to the shia, the US had to create a proxy who's appeal transcended sectarian concerns, and IS was born- the "jihad card!"

'Presto' and now we have the "jihad card." Talk about glib and trite, superficial.

The Iranian admiral is a jerk making idiotic noises. That however doesn't make the situation in the ME simple, black and white, or a fiasco.

U.S. special forces, CIA and the like and German KSK Kommando units have been on the ground there for some time because ISIS is a threat not only to the immediate ME region but to the larger area that includes Europe and extends to Australia. Anyone who might think the situation in the ME or in any Old World backward area that specializes in lawlessness treachery and butchery is a simple one, or is black and white would be a blistering fool.

You haven't lived in an Old World country society and culture where yes means no and no means double yes and I dunno means watch your back?

I agree, the use of "jihad card" was inappropriate and contributes nothing to the conversation; it was as you say.

I dont know where you are suggesting regarding my having lived here or there (or not), but I have lived and worked exactly in this location (AO) we are discussing. Moreover, my closest friends continue to work in this Area of Operations, and are covered in your description of who has "been on the ground there for some time." The problem is, we have been training the very people who are taking their skills back to the IS; and yes, others too (when I say training, I am referring to training within the past few years, not Iraq). This same thing happened with the al madhi army in Baghdad when we trained "locals" years previously.

I have a strange feeling you and I agree but that on the issue of the US being more involved with both sides of this, you do not. I get it. I had spent my entire life working for the US gov in various capacities, all of them related to this topic. It brings sadness to reach this observation; but it is inescapable. I detest Iran, and the general may be a jerk. However, he is correct. The US is fielding this proxy to fracture Iranian hegemony in the region. This is the single reason Qatar, SA, etc., would be funding a jihad that has them as the secondary targets- they simply had no better choices when the US insisted on direct negotiations with Iran, minimizing Riyadh and Doha.

[arjunadawn]

This from the OP is a good one that really misses the mark entirely and completely......

In taking a big jump ahead of international bodies, America seeks to emerge as a Hollywood-style hero battling a crisis of its own making," Admiral Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state news agency IRNA

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

This is disingenuous. This issue is hardly as simple as you suggest. The black and white you suggest is evident no where in this actual problem; this situation is very nuanced. The IS fiasco needs to be addressed, as does global jihad, but lets not send more people to die without recognizing what is really going on. This is a false flag operation if there ever has been one. The sad thing, a response must be forthcoming.

Good for anyone who supports the need to eradicate this muslim jihad BS. The very thing that the US seeks to address is largely created by the US (and proxies in the region). Parodying those who oppose your view is a silly and transparent attempt to marginalize those who disagree with you. However, I dont bite. I know your incorrect.

History will record this entire debacle as one of blowback. This is a textbook example of unintended consequences. IS was created for a limited regional end. Unable to call up shia, they were left with sunni. Unable to amass respect of sunni since surrendering Iraq to the shia, the US had to create a proxy who's appeal transcended sectarian concerns, and IS was born- the "jihad card!"

We're probably on the same page...except for "unintended consequences". The jihadist momentum was a foregone conclusion, and thus should be more fairly seen as a "regrettable (but predicted) cost". It's the interest rate on that cost that is higher than expected.

I say that with reference to how Al Qaeda-affiliated groups were financed to assist in the overthrowing of Gaddaffi. The Free Syrian Army was no less affiliated.

Not to mention financing Mujahadin in Afghanistan .

The men and women that sit in secure meeting rooms making these plans are the true evil.

It's a pity and a shame that Aussies may die to try to repair America's manipulations in the ME.

Actually, you are correct. I just responded to Publicus and I suggested by the end of my post that fielding a proxy army was a gamble because they are secondary targets (-other Mideastern countries. In jihadi worldview, next comes Israel and the US). So, yea, they are aware that this would be a very difficult thing to manage. As someone who believed they could consider the fallout and devise ways to capitalize on even that, yes, what IS is doing is not unexpected. "Unintended consequences" would actually not describe it.

[Lokie]

The UN should have sorted this all out back in the first Gulf War 1991, removed Saddam then and assisted in policing then forming an elected government in Iraq and brought stability to the region instead they mixed a right bottle and we are yet to deal with the real aftermath, quite scary the legacy being laid down... But then it was never about freedom was it, $ and Oil

[dexterm]

If IS is not bombing Australia, why is Australia helping to bomb them?

So don’t be surprised when IS attacks Australia. Just remember who upped the ante first.

Who is going to protect the 6-8 million Sunni civilians from the Iraqi Shia army once the 30,000 IS forces have been neutralized. There have already been massacres in “liberated” villages, and the Iraqi air force has been dropping indiscriminate barrel bombs on Sunni villages killing hundreds of their own civilian citizens.

In the process Australia and its allies are in danger of getting dragged into a sectarian war that is none of their business. The consequences not the cause will probably be to bring terror to the streets of Sydney and Melbourne. Thus it all becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Wasn’t one of the issues that caused the former Australian PM Howard to lose an election, his recklessly involving Australia in unnecessary foreign wars. When the body bags start coming home, maybe it will be ditto for Abbott.

[angsta]

Australia are one of the few Western nations who seem to have a clue about jihad (Canada is another).

Oh dear.

[Matej]

If the West will not destroy Islamic State, no one else will.

It's the right decision.

[Thorgal]

If the West will not destroy Islamic State, no one else will.

It's the right decision.

In fact the West is providing training and weapons in Syria to the rebels fighting against Assad.

Some of these rebels are...yes...ISIS...for a long time now...

Furthermore, the West is providing training and weapons to Iraqi Kurdish army now. They need to fight ISIS on the Iraqi front. It's known that some of those Kurdish soldiers are former PKK terrorists...

And to make the story complete, many ex-soldiers of the new Iraqi government were again trained and armed by the West for years. Many of them went over to ISIS...

Pandora's box with 'Axis of Evil' is indeed in Western Hollywood hands...

Edited September 14, 2014 by Thorgal

[Publicus]

America again. So it seems that the good admiral has already seen too many Batman, Superman, Spiderman movies in the covert secrecy of his private basement movie studio or wherever he and the Iranian elites catch their Hollywood movies.

Glib and culturally deficient statements such as these reflect the nature and character of those who not only oppose countering barbarian terrorists but who actively support them as state sponsors of terror and terrorists.

This is disingenuous. This issue is hardly as simple as you suggest. The black and white you suggest is evident no where in this actual problem; this situation is very nuanced. The IS fiasco needs to be addressed, as does global jihad, but lets not send more people to die without recognizing what is really going on. This is a false flag operation if there ever has been one. The sad thing, a response must be forthcoming.

Good for anyone who supports the need to eradicate this muslim jihad BS. The very thing that the US seeks to address is largely created by the US (and proxies in the region). Parodying those who oppose your view is a silly and transparent attempt to marginalize those who disagree with you. However, I dont bite. I know your incorrect.

History will record this entire debacle as one of blowback. This is a textbook example of unintended consequences. IS was created for a limited regional end. Unable to call up shia, they were left with sunni. Unable to amass respect of sunni since surrendering Iraq to the shia, the US had to create a proxy who's appeal transcended sectarian concerns, and IS was born- the "jihad card!"

'Presto' and now we have the "jihad card." Talk about glib and trite, superficial.

The Iranian admiral is a jerk making idiotic noises. That however doesn't make the situation in the ME simple, black and white, or a fiasco.

U.S. special forces, CIA and the like and German KSK Kommando units have been on the ground there for some time because ISIS is a threat not only to the immediate ME region but to the larger area that includes Europe and extends to Australia. Anyone who might think the situation in the ME or in any Old World backward area that specializes in lawlessness treachery and butchery is a simple one, or is black and white would be a blistering fool.

You haven't lived in an Old World country society and culture where yes means no and no means double yes and I dunno means watch your back?

I agree, the use of "jihad card" was inappropriate and contributes nothing to the conversation; it was as you say.

I dont know where you are suggesting regarding my having lived here or there (or not), but I have lived and worked exactly in this location (AO) we are discussing. Moreover, my closest friends continue to work in this Area of Operations, and are covered in your description of who has "been on the ground there for some time." The problem is, we have been training the very people who are taking their skills back to the IS; and yes, others too (when I say training, I am referring to training within the past few years, not Iraq). This same thing happened with the al madhi army in Baghdad when we trained "locals" years previously.

I have a strange feeling you and I agree but that on the issue of the US being more involved with both sides of this, you do not. I get it. I had spent my entire life working for the US gov in various capacities, all of them related to this topic. It brings sadness to reach this observation; but it is inescapable. I detest Iran, and the general may be a jerk. However, he is correct. The US is fielding this proxy to fracture Iranian hegemony in the region. This is the single reason Qatar, SA, etc., would be funding a jihad that has them as the secondary targets- they simply had no better choices when the US insisted on direct negotiations with Iran, minimizing Riyadh and Doha.

Now that the discourse concerning ISIS is back down to earth it can continue to move forward constructively to say that Washington is involved with all sides in almost any conflict almost anywhere. One needs only to look locally over the past several years to Washington's active involvement with those of all colors and persuasions. The local situation here, while serious, is nowhere near the same or similar to the complexities and nuances that attend the events and the peoples of the ME.

Washington has involved itself in its U.S. Central Command theatre with just about any and every group there is or has been, over a long period of time as groups turnover or come and go. That is a given. There is no question of Washington's involvement with ISIS, al Qaeda and many other extremist Muslim military jihadist groups - no question of it whatsoever.

My objection is to the warped portrayal by too many of Washington's involvement with the many and various ISIS styled groups of the region over several decades. The myth persists for instance that the U.S. created al Qaeda so I attack the simple minded myth when I see it, and I continue to see it regularly and predictably. In other words, Washington's policy of involving itself with groups on all sides, to include as many as possible in Iraq and Syria, does not mean it necessarily has "created" its own enemies of the moment.

You and I probably agree that armchair analysis here and elsewhere miss this important point of the US's long time policy to politically and personally interact inside all sides of a given conflict. It hasn't always been possible for Washington to insert itself among all the parties to a given conflict in a given place at a given time, but that as you should know is the policy and it has been effective over a long haul of decades.

It goes back to the latter phase of the Chinese civil war (1941-49) when Washington (the OSS) had two different teams of operatives, each opposite team quietly accepted by and into the camp of each rival combatant Mao Zedong, Chiang Kai Shek. Mao had OSS operatives trying to make him purr while Chiang had opposite operatives stroking him.

If I may mix it up, two can play this game and there's more than one way to skin a cat.

[Seastallion]

If IS is not bombing Australia, why is Australia helping to bomb them?

So don’t be surprised when IS attacks Australia. Just remember who upped the ante first.

Who is going to protect the 6-8 million Sunni civilians from the Iraqi Shia army once the 30,000 IS forces have been neutralized. There have already been massacres in “liberated” villages, and the Iraqi air force has been dropping indiscriminate barrel bombs on Sunni villages killing hundreds of their own civilian citizens.

In the process Australia and its allies are in danger of getting dragged into a sectarian war that is none of their business. The consequences not the cause will probably be to bring terror to the streets of Sydney and Melbourne. Thus it all becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Wasn’t one of the issues that caused the former Australian PM Howard to lose an election, his recklessly involving Australia in unnecessary foreign wars. When the body bags start coming home, maybe it will be ditto for Abbott..

Just remember who upped the ante first.

Yeah. Just remember. But of course if there was retaliation in Sydney, it will be twisted into a justification for having our troops being in Iraq in the first place.

Go figure.

[Credo]

If IS is not bombing Australia, why is Australia helping to bomb them?

So don’t be surprised when IS attacks Australia. Just remember who upped the ante first.

Who is going to protect the 6-8 million Sunni civilians from the Iraqi Shia army once the 30,000 IS forces have been neutralized. There have already been massacres in “liberated” villages, and the Iraqi air force has been dropping indiscriminate barrel bombs on Sunni villages killing hundreds of their own civilian citizens.

In the process Australia and its allies are in danger of getting dragged into a sectarian war that is none of their business. The consequences not the cause will probably be to bring terror to the streets of Sydney and Melbourne. Thus it all becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Wasn’t one of the issues that caused the former Australian PM Howard to lose an election, his recklessly involving Australia in unnecessary foreign wars. When the body bags start coming home, maybe it will be ditto for Abbott.

And doing nothing will make everything better in the ME? And ISIS has not made direct threats to the West?

I think your position is nothing more than a safe bet. When something happens, you can say, "I told you so".

ISIS are doing some very bad things to some very innocent people. I take it you don't believe there is any need to protect women and children from murder and rape because they are a different Muslim sect, or Christian, or Yazidiz or any of the other groups they target?

[Publicus]

National intelligence agencies have found a disconcerting number of citizens from their own respective Western country have gone to the ME to join and to fight with ISIS.

Each citizen who has done this holds the passport of his/her country and will use it upon return, whenever that may be.

Anyone who might think the passport is going to have a stamp in it of ISIS needs to think again, as the most recent date of the passport will show London or Dubai or Pretoria or wherever in order to cover their travels and ISIS terrorist activities.

These "citizen-terrorist" individuals don't give a rat's arse whether your government sends troops or not. You are an integral part of the Satan that is the Anglophone and also the Western world and they are going to try to blow you up. This is true in respect of any country of the West, some more than others on the list of priorities.

Do people in Australia think they are higher on the list than is the USA or lower on the list? Or does it really matter?

The only real issue is how to stop them and to preclude them harming Australians while simultaneously protecting the nation's values of being a liberal democracy.

I think most Australians appreciate hearing things straight on so that's how I'm going about it. And I don't believe I'm delivering a news bulletin either.

[dexterm]

If IS is not bombing Australia, why is Australia helping to bomb them?

So don’t be surprised when IS attacks Australia. Just remember who upped the ante first.

Who is going to protect the 6-8 million Sunni civilians from the Iraqi Shia army once the 30,000 IS forces have been neutralized. There have already been massacres in “liberated” villages, and the Iraqi air force has been dropping indiscriminate barrel bombs on Sunni villages killing hundreds of their own civilian citizens.

In the process Australia and its allies are in danger of getting dragged into a sectarian war that is none of their business. The consequences not the cause will probably be to bring terror to the streets of Sydney and Melbourne. Thus it all becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Wasn’t one of the issues that caused the former Australian PM Howard to lose an election, his recklessly involving Australia in unnecessary foreign wars. When the body bags start coming home, maybe it will be ditto for Abbott.

And doing nothing will make everything better in the ME? And ISIS has not made direct threats to the West?

I think your position is nothing more than a safe bet. When something happens, you can say, "I told you so".

ISIS are doing some very bad things to some very innocent people. I take it you don't believe there is any need to protect women and children from murder and rape because they are a different Muslim sect, or Christian, or Yazidiz or any of the other groups they target?

There are a lot of bad things happening all over the world. I am just curious as to why this particular conflict is suddenly the cause celebre? There’s a hidden agenda here.

Some very bad things were also happening to some very innocent people a few weeks ago less than 100 miles from the present action, and Australia didn’t say boo about that.

Obama in a speech the other day said: “At this moment, the greatest threats come from the Middle East and North Africa, where radical groups exploit grievances for their own gain. And one of those groups is Isil.”

Perhaps Australia and the coalition should be addressing some of these grievances rather than throwing more gas on the fire.

Australia and the coalition have now secured the safety of the Christians and Yazidis and the Kurds’ oil. Will they be equally outraged when Iraq’s Shia army start massacring innocent Sunni civilians in “liberated” villages?

Why not quit while you’re ahead? I think they already know the names of the terrorists who beheaded the two Americans and the Brit. Quietly take them out.

I think IS is more interested in nation building than idle threats to the west.

The present coalition’s so called goal is to “degrade and ultimately destroy Isil”. I am concerned about mission creep...same as happened last time... How will they know when they have destroyed them or will they just metamorphose into something else? How long is “ultimately”?

[Ulysses G.]

The present coalition’s so called goal is to “degrade and ultimately destroy Isil”.

Let's just hope that Obama stays with it until these savages are all dead.

[Publicus]

If IS is not bombing Australia, why is Australia helping to bomb them?

So don’t be surprised when IS attacks Australia. Just remember who upped the ante first.

Who is going to protect the 6-8 million Sunni civilians from the Iraqi Shia army once the 30,000 IS forces have been neutralized. There have already been massacres in “liberated” villages, and the Iraqi air force has been dropping indiscriminate barrel bombs on Sunni villages killing hundreds of their own civilian citizens.

In the process Australia and its allies are in danger of getting dragged into a sectarian war that is none of their business. The consequences not the cause will probably be to bring terror to the streets of Sydney and Melbourne. Thus it all becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Wasn’t one of the issues that caused the former Australian PM Howard to lose an election, his recklessly involving Australia in unnecessary foreign wars. When the body bags start coming home, maybe it will be ditto for Abbott.

And doing nothing will make everything better in the ME? And ISIS has not made direct threats to the West?

I think your position is nothing more than a safe bet. When something happens, you can say, "I told you so".

ISIS are doing some very bad things to some very innocent people. I take it you don't believe there is any need to protect women and children from murder and rape because they are a different Muslim sect, or Christian, or Yazidiz or any of the other groups they target?

<<snip>>

Obama in a speech the other day said: “At this moment, the greatest threats come from the Middle East and North Africa, where radical groups exploit grievances for their own gain. And one of those groups is Isil.”

Perhaps Australia and the coalition should be addressing some of these grievances rather than throwing more gas on the fire.

<<sinp>>

The principal grievance is that no one here is a radical jihadist terrorist Muslim hell bent on destroying the great Satan, i.e., the West and Israel too. If you wouldn't be encouraged or enticed by the guarantee of 72 virgins in the Muslim afterlife paradise I wouldn't know what to say to you.

For ISIS the only alternative remedy for not being a 100% exact and precise ISIS Muslim is to die and to exit this life by barbarous means.

I'll pay the air fare of anyone who accepts going over to Iraq and Syria to negotiate ISIS grievances face to face with the ISIS itself.

It of course will be a one way fare.

[Thorgal]

The present coalition’s so called goal is to “degrade and ultimately destroy Isil”.

Let's just hope that Obama stays with it until these savages are all dead.

Reminds me the 'domino effect' back in the 50's during Vietnam war. A lot of similarities in both conflicts.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory

Wiki quote : "During the Iran-Iraq war the US and other Western countries supported Iraq, fearing he spread of Iranian radical theocracy throughout the region.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, some neoconservatives argued that when a democratic government is implemented, it would then help spread democracy and liberalism across the Middle East. This has been refered as 'reverse domino theory', so called because of its effects are considered positive, not negative, by Western democratic states."

A lot of horrible things were predicted but finally never happened after the US troops left.

In that time the 'Axis of Evil' was communism. Now it's called Islam...

Australians and others should not be involved in this new US debacle with unknown proportions.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Thorgal

[Credo]

Why doesn't the West learn to stay out of these messes? The reason is that these messes seldom, if ever, are confined to the areas where they are occurring. First the neighboring countries are affected, with thousands of refugees and then eventually, the refugees start heading to places like Europe and Australia, which already has a well traveled route and plenty of people that know how to get them there.

Please note that it is usually the Western countries that are expected to provide the humanitarian relief. How kind of Turkey to allow us to send our food to feed their people.

As far as the lack of an outcry about the groups being persecuted a while ago, there was plenty of effort to help those isolated on a mountain top. The Kurds have been quietly being armed for quite some time, by the way.

As for addressing their grievances; OK, let's all convert to Islam because that's the big grievance and then we all better select the proper sect to belong to as well.

The West could chose to ignore it because I don't think there are going to be a lot of journalists going to record the atrocities for our watching enjoyment on the evening news.

[arjunadawn]

Now that the discourse concerning ISIS is back down to earth it can continue to move forward constructively to say that Washington is involved with all sides in almost any conflict almost anywhere. One needs only to look locally over the past several years to Washington's active involvement with those of all colors and persuasions. The local situation here, while serious, is nowhere near the same or similar to the complexities and nuances that attend the events and the peoples of the ME.

Washington has involved itself in its U.S. Central Command theatre with just about any and every group there is or has been, over a long period of time as groups turnover or come and go. That is a given. There is no question of Washington's involvement with ISIS, al Qaeda and many other extremist Muslim military jihadist groups - no question of it whatsoever.

My objection is to the warped portrayal by too many of Washington's involvement with the many and various ISIS styled groups of the region over several decades. The myth persists for instance that the U.S. created al Qaeda so I attack the simple minded myth when I see it, and I continue to see it regularly and predictably. In other words, Washington's policy of involving itself with groups on all sides, to include as many as possible in Iraq and Syria, does not mean it necessarily has "created" its own enemies of the moment.

You and I probably agree that armchair analysis here and elsewhere miss this important point of the US's long time policy to politically and personally interact inside all sides of a given conflict. It hasn't always been possible for Washington to insert itself among all the parties to a given conflict in a given place at a given time, but that as you should know is the policy and it has been effective over a long haul of decades.

It goes back to the latter phase of the Chinese civil war (1941-49) when Washington (the OSS) had two different teams of operatives, each opposite team quietly accepted by and into the camp of each rival combatant Mao Zedong, Chiang Kai Shek. Mao had OSS operatives trying to make him purr while Chiang had opposite operatives stroking him.

If I may mix it up, two can play this game and there's more than one way to skin a cat.

Where we differ is not simply the main point, but from where the view is obtained; "I dont observe from an armchair!"

I am one of the ppl on the ground. Good luck with that theory thing.