France sends Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier for anti-ISIS op in Iraq
Author Message
Aemma
Offline
...



France

Posts: 2.249
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 957
Post: #21
RE: France sends Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier for anti-ISIS op in Iraq
(2015 Jan 16 14:16)Temnozor Wrote:  
(2015 Jan 16 01:07)Aemma Wrote:  And what's your motivation for bringing up Assad into this conversation, of all people?

The OP article claims that France is sending this aircraft carrier to counter ISIS. Assad and the Syrian Army are the only ones currently fighting ISIS on the ground (I'm deliberately not counting Iraq or the Kurds), so supporting him would actually make a difference against ISIS (unlike the West's and France's current policies in the Middle East). It's a logical conclusion.

I guess you weren't aware that there's been some talk for quite some time now about the USA helping out?

Anyway, as fate would have it, look! Fresh off the press today!:

Quote:U.S. To Deploy 400 Troops To Train Syrian Opposition To Defeat ISIS

The U.S. will deploy about 400 troops this spring to help train moderate opposition rebels to defeat Islamic State militants, Reuters reported.

The troops will work out of training sites in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, Cmdr. Elissa Smith, a Defense Department spokesperson, said in the Army Times.

The troops will also be supported by hundreds of enabling forces who will provide security and other services, Defense One reported.

The goal of the deployment is to train more than 5,000 rebels in the first year to push back against Islamic State militants who have seized large swaths of Syria and Iraq. Coalition partners are expected to contribute forces to the training effort as well. {I'm pretty sure that means France as well by the way}

According to Reuters, up to 15,000 trained Syrian rebels will be needed to retake areas in the east that are already controlled by ISIS.

Identifying rebel fighters who don't have ties to ISIS or the main al Qaeda affiliate in Syria will be extremely difficult, but Pentagon officials said they're confident U.S. forces can recruit and train a moderate fighting force against the terrorists.

“We ... know the Syrian opposition better now than we did two years ago through the programs we’ve had providing non-lethal assistance,” Smith said.

“This is going to be hard,” one unidentified senior defense official told Defense One. “We have to recruit the guys, we have to assume that there are a lot of guys who are recruitable, there’s got to be some vetting. This is not going to be an easy enterprise here.”

For months, an American-led campaign has pounded militant sites in Syria with nearly 800 airstrikes. Yet ISIS has continued to claim territory, including large segments of the Homs Desert, The Wall Street Journal reported.

“The coalition strikes seem similar to drone campaigns in Yemen or Pakistan, targeting only leadership. The front-line strength of ISIS has undoubtedly increased even as some of these targeted strikes take out mid-level individual leaders,” Mouaz Moustafa, political adviser for the Coalition for a Democratic Syria, told the Daily Beast earlier this week.

More than 3,000 U.S. troops have also been authorized to train security forces in Iraq. Total cost for the effort: $1.2 billion.

CORRECTION: A previous version of this article stated incorrectly that U.S. troops are deploying to Syria. As noted elsewhere in the article, the troops will be stationed rather at training sites in other states in the region.

Source

So something *IS* happening. These things take time to figure out logistically.




Temnozor Wrote:
(2015 Jan 16 01:07)Aemma Wrote:  I honestly couldn't care less about Syria right now. I do however care about France and her future. Do you mind telling me how my concerns for France should be trumped by my concerns for Syria?

I'm not of Syrian extraction if you didn't know.

You appear to be concerned about France in the same way as Americans who supported the invasion of Iraq were after 9/11, though. It won't do much good.

Did you actually read any of my posts in this thread, Temnozor? I find it rather curious that a guy who's not ever taken the time to get to know anything about me would say such a thing. But then again, it shouldn't really surprise me that you paint me with the same brush as you would any other non-European.

How about you re-read that bit about me caring about France and how that factors into my own life as a French Canadian. While you're at it, you might want to re-read some of my other posts that I've written over the years here. But this time, please, take your anti-North America glasses off.

By the way, were you aware that Canada did *NOT* support the War in Iraq? No I doubt you knew this too....

Look here another news article!:

Quote:As the 10th anniversary of the bloody Iraq War approaches, former prime minister Jean Chretien says he has no regrets about rejecting Canada’s participation in the U.S.-led mission.
“It was a very important decision, no doubt about it. It was, in fact, the first time ever that there was a war that the Brits and the Americans were involved and Canada was not there,” Chretien told CTV’s Power Play.

The move also helped assert Canada’s independence on the world stage, he said.

“Unfortunately, a lot of people thought sometimes that we were the 51st state of America. It was clear that day that we were not.”

Chretien said he refused to commit to military action in Iraq without a resolution from the UN Security Council. He said Canada always followed the UN and intervened in other conflicts when asked to.

Chretien also said he was not convinced that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction – the threat that fuelled support for a U.S.-led invasion of the country -- and that turned out to be true.

While Chretien’s firm “no” stunned the U.S., the White House was not angry about it as many believed, he said.

Chretien remembered running into Andrew Card, President George W. Bush’s chief of staff, a few weeks later at a wedding. He said Carr told him: “We were surprised, but you didn’t double-cross us.”

The Iraq invasion began on March 20, 2003. More than 4,000 U.S. soldiers were killed and more than 31,000 were wounded. The last convoy of U.S. troops left Iraq in 2011.

“I had to send troops in many places when I was prime minister and it’s always a worry you have because you’re asking young Canadians to go abroad and some will not come back,” Chretien said.
This one, I thought the Americans were wrong.

Chretien also addressed his visit to Venezuela last week to attend President Hugo Chavez’s funeral.
He said he went because he knew Chavez personally and “never had any problem” with the controversial leader even though he didn’t agree with him “on many things.” He also wanted to show his respect for the people of Venezuela.

“He had support of the people and he was loved by the poor of his country. He was kind of a Robin Hood,” Chretien said.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper angered the Venezuelan administration by saying in a statement that he hoped the country can have a “better, brighter future” after Chavez’s death.
Chretien said the Venezuelan authorities were “very, very happy” to see him at the funeral, because they were “very unhappy” with Harper’s remarks.

Source

A bit of a dated article but the facts still hold. We did *not* support Bush in this one. I voted for Chrétien's party, the Liberals, by the way. I was *not* disappointed with his leadership with regards to this matter. And for the record, I think the way Saddam met his fate was heinous. It`s certainly not something I relished hearing about. We have international courts for a reason. Vigilante justice is not something I support.


So how about before you start accusing me of being a certain way, you go back and re-read some things that I've said on this forum. I don't think you will though since it doesn't really fit into your agenda of Western World Hatred.

dunno

~Be the Virtuous Man or Woman you are meant to be.~
2015 Jan 16 17:38
Like PostLIKE REPLY
Aramis
Offline
Angloholic



Hrvatska

Posts: 873
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 403
Post: #22
RE: France sends Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier for anti-ISIS op in Iraq
(2015 Jan 16 16:43)Aemma Wrote:  "Muscle flexing" is a figure of speech. It can mean a whole lot of things, in this respect I meant it to mean having some kind of military presence even if they're just sitting there in a big boat. I didn't say they ought to be bombing them. I seem to remember that I specifically said up thread that I don't mean bombing them.

The military presence of one state on another ones territory implies a certain interest, which will by time objectivize on both sides through a series of casual effects. In our most recent example, the Charlie Hebdo case.
As for the interests in question, excuse my most cynical and distrusting approach, but history (both ancient and most recent) is a genuine testimony of the reason d'etre behind them not being the deffence of supposed civilisational Values, but simple material and resorcial ones.

Quote:As for the "looney" Muslims, the problem most recently seems to stem from European countries allowing *known* people-of-questionable-motives to be flying around from country to country, going to Syria or Yemen "to visit" when it seems that they are going there for other purposes. It's ridiculous that these governments are allowing people to fly back and forth like that. Add to that that even native Europeans are converting to Islam, usually young politically and culturally disenfranchised unemployed men, and coming back totally radicalised and doing what they do best: expending ridiculous amounts of energy on destroying communities, culture, you-name-it. And you all think that by the ever-so evil West simply curbing its presence in certain parts of the world will fix all of this? I think that's very naive thinking.

I'd really like you to point out one post where somebody on this forum claims the relocation of Western troops off Middle eastern territory will "fix all of this".

It was never about extinguishing the Fire, but agreeing upon the simple fact that adding extra oil won't (most obviously) do much good.

Quote:And by "progressive West" you mean the USA I suppose? All I can say to that is that, you know, France, England, even modern-day Germany are as complicit in their own demise as anything else. It's ludicrous to pin everything that's wrong in the Western World on the USA.

No, wrong there. I meant the whole West, not the US of A alone. I was even talking about particularly French military interventions most of the time.

Quote:It's how "the West" developed, Aramis. I'm sorry but that's how the universe sought for this part of human history on this planet to develop. I don't know why most of you here tend to go on crying over spilt milk. We can't go back in time. And I can assure you that any changes that will occur to rectify any of this is more than likely going to take as much time to resolve as it did for us to get where we are today.

Sure, sure. You consider actions such as the one described in the topic article to be not only a legitimate but (honest?) and pragmatic approach to solving Western islamist issues.

If the rulers of the Free World would possess even the slightest hint of a moral fibre - having first and foremost the interests and wellbeing of their voters at sight - I'd even support the execution of ridiculous maneuvers such as with this French aircraft carrier. But they don't, so I shan't.
While the West and their allies continuou to pilage the Globe, Europeans themselves are living each year in worse material and psychological conditions.

"It's how "the West" developed" and "we can't go back in time" is a pity excuse. No one expects miracles from our leaders, but how about not exercising the same routine as throughout the past hundred years, under the pretence of civilizing savages? What a marvelous start that would be!
It's unrealistic you say? So is generally considering Hollande's actions productive and beneficial for French national interests.

Samo kurvi i konobaru pare ostavljam.
2015 Jan 16 18:56
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 1 user Likes Aramis's post:
Osweo (17-01-2015)
Temnozor
Offline
Kornilov did nothing wrong
Supervision



Россия

Posts: 2.563
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 641
Post: #23
RE: France sends Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier for anti-ISIS op in Iraq
(2015 Jan 16 17:38)Aemma Wrote:  I guess you weren't aware that there's been some talk for quite some time now about the USA helping out?

Anyway, as fate would have it, look! Fresh off the press today!:
(2015 Jan 16 17:38)Aemma Wrote:  The U.S. will deploy about 400 troops this spring to help train moderate opposition rebels to defeat Islamic State militants etc.

Most of the stuff the U.S. is providing to the FSA, which they consider to be "moderate opposition", ends up in the hands of the Islamic Front, the militia that's currently holding most of Aleppo. The Islamic Front isn't "formally" supported by the U.S., but it is affiliated with the FSA, which itself, frankly, is a strawman and as much of a jihadist group as the IF or ISIS. Except the Kurdish forces (who are irrelevant) there is no secular "opposition" in Syria, the U.S. and its NATO "allies" are just dropping weapons into a giant islamist clusterfuck. The only reason why ISIS is even a thing now, is precisely because they were constantly backed by the West, which at the same time sabotaged the only ones fighting them - the Syrian army.

The more the West intervenes in the Middle East, the stronger ISIS will grow. And as already has been stated, the mere idea that sending the French navy on any sort of mission there will do anything about France's problems with terrorism is just ridiculous.

(2015 Jan 16 17:38)Aemma Wrote:  Did you actually read any of my posts in this thread, Temnozor? I find it rather curious that a guy who's not ever taken the time to get to know anything about me would say such a thing. But then again, it shouldn't really surprise me that you paint me with the same brush as you would any other non-European.

How about you re-read that bit about me caring about France and how that factors into my own life as a French Canadian. While you're at it, you might want to re-read some of my other posts that I've written over the years here. But this time, please, take your anti-North America glasses off.

I'm not much of an eurocentric, I don't care about where you come from. Just pointing out what I see as a flawed logic, the same kind of flawed logic I've witnessed since the start of the "war on terror", not only among Americans.

(2015 Jan 16 17:38)Aemma Wrote:  By the way, were you aware that Canada did *NOT* support the War in Iraq? No I doubt you knew this too....

A bit of a dated article but the facts still hold. We did *not* support Bush in this one. I voted for Chrétien's party, the Liberals, by the way. I was *not* disappointed with his leadership with regards to this matter. And for the record, I think the way Saddam met his fate was heinous. It`s certainly not something I relished hearing about. We have international courts for a reason. Vigilante justice is not something I support.

How's that related? I didn't mention Canada a single time.

"Whoever says that he "belongs to his time" is only saying that he agrees with the largest number of fools at that moment." - Nicolás Gómez Dávila

[Image: ecc9v9ru.jpg]
2015 Jan 16 20:19
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 2 users Like Temnozor's post:
Aptrgangr (16-01-2015), Osweo (17-01-2015)
Temnozor
Offline
Kornilov did nothing wrong
Supervision



Россия

Posts: 2.563
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 641
Post: #24
RE: France sends Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier for anti-ISIS op in Iraq



"Whoever says that he "belongs to his time" is only saying that he agrees with the largest number of fools at that moment." - Nicolás Gómez Dávila

[Image: ecc9v9ru.jpg]
2015 Jan 17 12:12
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 1 user Likes Temnozor's post:
Osweo (17-01-2015)
Erwann
Offline
Make Armorica Great Again
Supervision



Breizh

Posts: 742
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 275
Post: #25
RE: France sends Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier for anti-ISIS op in Iraq
(2015 Jan 15 23:13)Aemma Wrote:  What do you suggest exactly?

1. Stop immigration
2. Stop helping ISIS
3. Remigration of non-European migrants (just like when Europeans have left Algeria after its independence)
4. Help Bashar al-Assad to remove islamists

Trying to copy the USA in the middle east when you have 10 or 15 million of muslims (and they are growing), that's just totally silly. But maybe that's what NATO really wants, another war in Europe.
2015 Jan 22 19:42
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 2 users Like Erwann's post:
Osweo (22-01-2015), Temnozor (22-01-2015)


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)