"Australia PM says no global support for troops on the ground in Syria - 24 Nov 2015 The Straits Times
SYDNEY (AFP) - Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said Tuesday (Nov 24) there was no global support for a US-led ground force to destroy the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which he called fundamentally weak with "more Twitter accounts than fighters".
Calls have been mounting in Canberra for boots on the ground in Syria to combat the threat from ISIS extremists and other militant groups in the wake of deadly attacks in Paris this month.
But after attending a series of recent global summits, Turnbull said in a national security address to parliament that there was no appetite for such a move.
"I have to report to the House that the consensus of the leaders I met at the G20, at Apec and at the East Asia Summit is that there is no support currently for a large US-led Western army to attempt to conquer and hold ISIL-controlled areas," he said, referring to another term for ISIS."
Australia has for months been active in Iraq, and recently started carrying out air strikes against ISIS targets in Syria as part of a 60-nation, US-led coalition against the terrorists."
Interesting bits from the NEWEST Australian PM in the last 3 years!
Lessons for me are:
1. IF ISIS is so weak, surely a concerted effort to annihilate it should be a catwalk in the park. No? Alas, why there is NO appetite for such a move by the 'allies' of the USA?;
2. what are the main objectives of taking out ISIS? To stop its terrorists terrorising the 'free world' and anyone that the leaders of ISIS deemed as unfriendly or accomplices in targeting ISIS subjects? or to protect some 'allies of the USA' who will protect the interest of Americans and American corporations?;
3. whatever it may be. As long as the 'cause is perceived to be UNJUST', annihilation of ISIS will not be supported full-heartedly. When the 'cause to go to war is unjust, it is hard for the troops to fight' with dedication and with valour!
I will leave the international intrigues to the big and powerful countries and their respective foreign affairs and intelligent agencies staffs to figure them out.
From my simple mind, the way to tackle this particular terrorist group is to let the Muslims settle the differences among themselves. All other countries or religious groups should stay out of it. If they fight locally, nobody should interfere too much. It is their fights. Not ours. Yes?
SYDNEY (AFP) - Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said Tuesday (Nov 24) there was no global support for a US-led ground force to destroy the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which he called fundamentally weak with "more Twitter accounts than fighters".
Calls have been mounting in Canberra for boots on the ground in Syria to combat the threat from ISIS extremists and other militant groups in the wake of deadly attacks in Paris this month.
But after attending a series of recent global summits, Turnbull said in a national security address to parliament that there was no appetite for such a move.
"I have to report to the House that the consensus of the leaders I met at the G20, at Apec and at the East Asia Summit is that there is no support currently for a large US-led Western army to attempt to conquer and hold ISIL-controlled areas," he said, referring to another term for ISIS."
Australia has for months been active in Iraq, and recently started carrying out air strikes against ISIS targets in Syria as part of a 60-nation, US-led coalition against the terrorists."
Interesting bits from the NEWEST Australian PM in the last 3 years!
Lessons for me are:
1. IF ISIS is so weak, surely a concerted effort to annihilate it should be a catwalk in the park. No? Alas, why there is NO appetite for such a move by the 'allies' of the USA?;
2. what are the main objectives of taking out ISIS? To stop its terrorists terrorising the 'free world' and anyone that the leaders of ISIS deemed as unfriendly or accomplices in targeting ISIS subjects? or to protect some 'allies of the USA' who will protect the interest of Americans and American corporations?;
3. whatever it may be. As long as the 'cause is perceived to be UNJUST', annihilation of ISIS will not be supported full-heartedly. When the 'cause to go to war is unjust, it is hard for the troops to fight' with dedication and with valour!
I will leave the international intrigues to the big and powerful countries and their respective foreign affairs and intelligent agencies staffs to figure them out.
From my simple mind, the way to tackle this particular terrorist group is to let the Muslims settle the differences among themselves. All other countries or religious groups should stay out of it. If they fight locally, nobody should interfere too much. It is their fights. Not ours. Yes?
No comments:
Post a Comment