It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
You would like to think so wouldnt you.
But say Labour had sneaked the last election or ended up in coalition with SNP and then Ed Miliband had done a John Smith and dropped dead; Corbyn could well be sitting there in charge of a nuclear arsenal now and on the phone to his mates Gerry Adams or Hamas as to where he should bomb first!!
. We can bomb ISIS bases and oil fields and then after a few years they mount an attack on a civil population in some western country.
ISIS and Al Queda does not have a nuclear navy to transcend the globe and launch air strikes from carriers, they do not have guided missile cruisers and submarines that can hurl cruise missiles into our cities. All they have are thousands of cells that act independently and launch attacks at our civilians, the way we target their civilians with our bombings and missile strikes.
During WW2 British, German, Japanese, Chinese, Russian, Dutch, Polish, etc populations were subjected to the terror of air bombings. The USA was spared such horror. Now in the 21st Century, we are also "under the gun" and can be attacked this way as well. All we can do is continue to live our lives, hope our intelligence and law enforcement agencies can give us adequate warning and take proper precautions.
I doubt that the bombing campaigns in Syria, Iraq, etc is going to ever stamp out the terrorists. Its like we are attacking an ant hill. We may kill hundreds or thousands but one never kill all the ants and yes, we can expect to get stung now and then.
This insane form of Islam developed in direct response to colonialism. It has now spread worldwide thanks to the generous financial support of our "allies" in Saudi and the other corrupt oil sheikhdoms.
So we reap what we sow in many respects.
Having said that, however much you can rationally explain the origins of this phenomenon and identify genuine grievances as its root cause, I think everyone is pretty tired now of the preening, imbecilic, bunch of onanists that go by the name of 'ISIL'. And frankly the time has come, regardless of the risk of appearing to be colonialists, to kick the cr*p out of them.
I think a largely unintended consequence of ISIL's actions is that they're creating a grand alliance against Islamist extremists. Russia is patching up relations with the west and China is saying they want their own problems with Islamo nutters recognised as part of a global conflict. Basically the worlds major powers are finally becoming aligned on one agreed policy - wiping the nutters from the face of the earth. And I'm fairly confident it's going to start happening - right now. The kid gloves are coming off.
Islamic "colonialism" if that's what you want to call it was very different to European colonialism. But anyway, what's your point?
Since The Soviet Union collapsed, America has had its way in the Middle East, and made a mess of it. ISIL is a direct result of the Iraq war (they are disenfranchised/disaffected Sunni Iraqi/Syrians who lost power post-Hussein).
So Russia getting back into the game there is a welcome thing, because having two superpowers (and possibly a third with China) engaged is better than one (who had no strategy to begin with.....or even a clue).
You're right of course, but it does feel like it's reached the point where they have to be crushed. Regardless of whether their disenchantment originates from legitimate grievance.
My point is the people of North Africa and the Middle East never had it as good as when Europe was in charge. Or do you think otherwise?
Now that Russia is re-engaged, hopefully once they are 'crushed', there is a plan in place to have that place properly governed and legitimately opened up to the world (trade and opportunity for the masses).
It is post-bombing campaign that always fails. No one is doubting 'shock and awe' to eventually force submission.
Funny you say that. Islam means submission. Not peace as some muslim hypocrites, and Christian ones as well will have you believe. The word for peace is salam.
I think people are almost always happier when they're running they're own affairs.
Also, I was reading an article recently about how France and Britain ran their mandates in the Middle East after WW1. We did a pretty awful job and were widely despised by the locals. There were massive revolts against the French in Syria and against the British in Iraq - led by the Kurds. The French and British response was widespread bombing, extrajudicial killings and violent suppression of the 'natives' - essentially a reign of terror.
Like now, aerial bombing was seen as cheaper and safer than boots on the ground.
We Brits even managed to set the scene for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by encouraging widespread Jewish immigration to Palestine.
And we wonder where all the hate comes from.
One thing the Arabs love to do is hold a grudge and they have very long memories.
We should find other sources of oil or stop driving so many cars at least until the people of the Middle East figure it out themselves.
The way Europe had to deal with the issues leading up to the two World Wars and the way the USA had to deal with the slavery issue.
Yes, if pigs fly & we get the second coming....! :))
I wouldn't just blame the US - you guys just made a bad situation a whole lot worse - backing the Shah in Iran, Saddam in Iraq etc. etc.
Britain and France bear a lot of the blame as well, historically.
There is a side of me that thinks you should just let them slog it out themselves. Europe tore itself apart for centuries before finally arriving at some sort of workable peace (let's see how much longer that lasts).
It's one of the problems with the western liberal world view - we feel compelled to intervene and meddle everywhere, for the 'good' of the locals. It used to be straight colonialism and now it's neo-colonialism, but the impulses and effects remain largely the same.
And the yoke of islam and sharia laws give them that? Please, the fact that the West these days support and ally with theocratic and barbaric regimes while demonizing others, even less vile ones, tells me it has nothing to do with the interests of the people. It is all about economic, strategic and power interests.
I'm not defending lunatic theocracy.
You have to remember that historically Islam was probably more tolerant than Christian societies, so in the past at least, people living in Muslim cultures were in many respects 'freer'. Not the case today of course, but an historical fact.
Also, in the period after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and say up to the 1970s, Arab opposition to western colonialism and intervention was not Islamist - it was usually secular or very religiously moderate. By crushing and overthrowing moderate opposition to western interference we created the environment in which nutters could flourish.
It's a bit like 1920s and 1930s Germany. France and Britain imposed intolerable repayments on Germany, undermining the moderate political parties and creating the environment in which Nazism could flourish.
Put it this way......Corbyn has as much chance of being next UK Prime minister, as Pierce Brosnan has, of returning to being Bond again!
Corbyn is a nutter...........and the British public, know this.
The important question-who isn t?
Don't be such a spoiler. :)
Shame Cameron has already announced that he won't be stand again as leader of the Tories at the next election...
The bible more than anything doesn't expect people to blindly follow it's teachings. It's an impossible task to do so. It was one of the reasons why God was pissed at Moses for destroying the commandments. The point of the bible is to facilitate a channel of communication between God and man. Everything else is secondary or been twisted to scare people and serve the agendas of whatever crazy denominations there are out there; some unfortunately taking every word to be literal.That being said, the bible has its share of interesting but breathtakingly ruthless and shocking moments, particularly in the old testament.
I take from this that you are a practicing cristian which is your right under the freedom we all enjoy, if so we have nothing more to say, all I would ask is that you research the writing of the bible & how it came about.
It's all to easy to believe no more religion would mean no more war or conflict.