andrewza:


Now you say UK see if you started with UK you would be correct. Britain is not UK UK is not Britain. There is a big difference that one would know if he spoke to people there. I spoke in depth with a Protestant Northern Irish Royal Marine LtCol ret who served during the troubles. Dont call him a Brit he does not fight for Britain but fought for the UK.

The fact you said there was insurrection in Britain is why i said you unqualified to call some one idiotic. If you said UK i would have ignored your post like i ignore most posts here.

Lol... Andrew.. Aren't you just ignorant.

UK is nothing more than a British empire.

Britain controls the military and provides security to the union. You can disproof that if you wish

British government and troops took over the insurgency war in northern Ireland and Thatcher was the commander in chief you ignoramus

lionel4power:
I was SHOUTING because you argue like a 5 year old.
.

Good thing you noticed

stillchris:

Lol... Andrew.. Aren't you just ignorant.

UK is nothing more than a British empire.

Britain controls the military and provides security to the union. You can disproof that if you wish

British government and troops took over the insurgency war in northern Ireland and Thatcher was the commander in chief you ignoramus

No, the UK is the United Kingdom, which simply means that various kingdoms are united. Which allows referendums about whether Scotland could get out, for example, a few months ago. The fact that Ireland had an army tells you that Britains influence over Ireland at the time, was nothing comparable to Nigeria's influence over all the Nigerian territories where BH is.

Apples can never be compared to oranges, hard though you may try.

DieVluit:


Hahaha, Henry stop drifting. Your argument is based on the fact that Nigeria's failures are not as pronounced because the US has failed to kill off insurgency in foreign lands, where it has been for a long time. So, blitzkrieg raids are irrelevant to your argument. We are talking about sustained warfare here, as per your original argument.

The simple response to you is that the US, without the security of being home, without the power over legislation and such, cannot be compared to a Nigeria that is at home. You deny that because? Don't start "presenting me with facts on Nigeria's COIN activities". Just tell me why a US in foreign lands is comparable to a Nigeria that is home based. It's not that complicated.

What can be more sustained than the U.S figthing insurgents non-stop for 29 years?


Are you a fool? The U.S fighting abroad is not an excuse, as they have the world's largest capability to project and sustain force for over 50 years and the intelligence infrastructure to continually sustain that force for 50 years.

For the U.S it simply doesn't matter where they fight, abroad or at home. In Iraq they had total control of the country, with the Iraqi constitution suspended.


Nigeria has had it's shortcomings in the Fight against terror, but this fight against terror has again proven the might of the Nigerian military.

There cannot be an argument if you do not understand the facts on the ground.

Henry240:


What can be more sustained than the U.S figthing insurgents non-stop for 29 years?


Are you a fool? The U.S fighting abroad is not an excuse, as they have the world's largest capability to project and sustain force for over 50 years and the intelligence infrastructure to continually sustain that force for 50 years.

For the U.S it simply doesn't matter where they fight, abroad or at home. In Iraq they had total control of the country, with the Iraqi constitution suspended.


Nigeria has had it's shortcomings in the Fight against terror, but this fight against terror has again proven the might of the Nigerian military.

There cannot be an argument if you do not understand the facts on the ground.

There is no bigger fool than one who wants to argue that if the insurgents were based in the US, the US would fight them for 29 years. That is exactly what you are arguing if you don't want to recognise that the US is fighting abroad. You are basically telling us that a home-based US would fare in the same way as a foreign-based US. Are you a fool, Henry? Is that what you are?

There is no such thing as total control for a foreign-based military. They had to deal with budgetary issues at home, a congress that had to fend off complaints about the cost of the war on the fiscus and lives. Questions about why "we need to be there". Iraqi politics and such. No Henry. Are you really a fool?

The facts on the ground are that armed with a state of emergency and the freedom of the land, the Nigerian army can run as far as it wishes to in Nigeria. It has limited people's rights under the state of emergency. Civilians have offered to assist et cetera. Yet, there is failure. This is unforgivable.

stillchris:

Lol... Andrew.. Aren't you just ignorant.

UK is nothing more than a British empire.

Britain controls the military and provides security to the union. You can disproof that if you wish

British government and troops took over the insurgency war in northern Ireland and Thatcher was the commander in chief you ignoramus

Again its geology. Nothern Ireland is located in Ireland and is part of the UK Great Britain normally called Britain is a Island witch has 3 countries in it England, Scotland and Wales. These 3 countries form the UK along with Northern Ireland form the UK.

andrewza:



It not military is geology.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain

Ireland is not in Britain. Ireland is a separate land mass. This is the full name of the UK

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Notice Ireland is separate since it is not part of Britain.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the
United Kingdom (UK) or Britain,[nb 5] is a
sovereign state in Europe

many smaller islands.[8] Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK that shares a land border with another state—the Republic of Ireland
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

Nice try. The British government provides security to the UK.

That's what you should disproof.

Nothern Ireland is under the British control

DieVluit:


[s]No, the UK the United Kingdom, which simply means that various kingdoms are united. Which allows referendums about whether Scotland could get out, for example. The fact that Ireland had an army tells you that Britains influence over Ireland at the time, was nothing comparable to Nigeria's influence over all the Nigerian territories where BH is.

Apples can never be compared to oranges, hard though you may try[/s].

Still no content

stillchris:


Still no content

You cannot cancel something out without reading it. That's all that matters, second to the fact that the entire Ireland argument is built on my steer anyway.

DieVluit:


There is no bigger fool than one who wants to argue that if the insurgents were based in the US, the US would fight them for 29 years. That is exactly what you are arguing if you don't want to recognise that the US is fighting abroad. You are basically telling us that a home-based US would fare in the same way as a foreign-based US. Are you a fool, Henry? Is that what you are?

There is no such thing as total control for a foreign-based military. They had to deal with budgetary issues at home, a congress that had to fend off complaints about the cost of the war on the fiscus and lives. Questions about why "we need to be there". Iraqi politics and such. No Henry. Are you really a fool?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan


This wikipedia link best describes how the U.S would deal with Islamic extremism.


The facts show, they aren't stellar.

andrewza:



Again its geology. Nothern Ireland is located in Ireland and is part of the UK Great Britain normally called Britain is a Island witch has 3 countries in it England, Scotland and Wales. These 3 countries form the UK along with Northern Ireland form the UK.

Read you comment again and tell me how this disproof the fact that northern Ireland is not in British territory and control

Henry240:


It simply does not matter.

The U.S has by far the world's largest force projection.

The U.S unilaterally invades who, when and whenever it wants. Laws do not apply.


What is France doing?

Yes, it does matter when YOU ARE FIGHTING AT HOME and they are FIGHTING IN ANOTHER COUNTRY

I am not talking about logistics you slowpoke.

What is france doing? Making arrests and bombing Syria.

stillchris:


The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the
United Kingdom (UK) or Britain,[nb 5] is a
sovereign state in Europe

many smaller islands.[8] Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK that shares a land border with another state—the Republic of Ireland
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

Nice try. The British government provides security to the UK.

That's what you should disproof.

Nothern Ireland is under the British control

And still does not change the fact the insurgency was based in ireland a seprate land mass and diffrent people. You could rightly comparie BH if they where ethnically from Chad with support from people living in Chad.


Not to mention BH once captured a area larger than northern Ireland and held it for month's. At no time did the IRA captuer and administrate a suburb never mind cities.

DieVluit:


[s]You cannot cancel something out without reading it. That's all that matters, second to the fact that the entire Ireland argument is built on my steer anyway[/s].

Take example from Andrew if you want an argument.

You argue like a 5 year old. It's too petty for me

stillchris:



Read again before exposing how you feel about it. #butthurt

The dullard doesn't read. LMFAO!!

lionel4power:

[s]Please read this statements.

France begs
-According to Gen. Gormert , “In the area of geo- spatial
intelligence, we will seriously rely on you to help us develop that
capacity. We are in the process of setting up that department.

France begs us to take them to next level.

-“I believe in building up capacity we must leverage on our capable
partners like you to help us from the level which we were, to a
higher level .

then Nigeria replies.
- As a nation, we understand the feelings that you are going through
right now, because we have the same nuisance in our hands,”

TRANSLATION.
France; "please we seriously rely on you to help us on Intel., we are setting up the department.

france; since you are one of our capable partners.... help us to the next level"

Nigeria replies; don't worry friend we too had the same nuisance... so we'll help that's what friends do"

Do you understand now?[/s]

That is not at all what they are saying you slowpoke

They are saying: We dont have many assets in play in the area you are fighting BH, please can you share what you learn

Fvckwit

stillchris:




Read again before exposing how you feel about it. #butthurt

I feel nothing

Sharing intelligence is common practice

We have been doing so intensely with the Americans since 9/11

Henry240:


The dullard doesn't read. LMFAO!!

I did read

That is why I am trying to figure out why you are trying to make such a big deal about it

Typical Nigerian hubris I guess

andrewza:


And still does not change the fact the insurgency was based in ireland a seprate land mass and diffrent people. You could rightly comparie BH if they where ethnically from Chad with support from people living in Chad.


Not to mention BH once captured a area larger than northern Ireland and held it for month's. At no time did the IRA captuer and administrate a suburb never mind cities.

No. The fact that hasn't changed is that northern Ireland is a part of UK controlled and protected by the british. British troops fought unsuccessfully for 20 years. That's a fact.

Yes they held territory for months and that could be attributed to failed leadership.

Fact of this argument is that insurgency is not an easy war to fight. Whether by a super power of a third world country.

stillchris:


Read you comment again and tell me how this disproof the fact that northern Ireland is not in British territory and control

It is British territory as munch as Nigeria, South Africa, India, extra was there territory. Yeah it belonged to them but it was not them. There is a difference. That tiny piece of water separating Ireland from Britain makes a big difference.

stillchris:


No. The fact that hasn't changed is that northern Ireland is a part of UK controlled and protected by the british. British troops fought unsuccessfully for 20 years. That's a fact.

Yes they held territory for months and that could be attributed to failed leadership.

Fact of this argument is that insurgency is not an easy war to fight. Whether by a super power of a third world country.

1. Ireland is a different country - Irish live there, not the English

2. UK WON that war

3. It can be attributed to a failed army

Insurgency is not hard, if you know what you are doing - look at SWAPO in namibia. In a purely military sense they were no longer effective from ~1972/3 onward (4 years after they took up armed struggle). Look at the Americans in Veitnam - the Veit Cong were all but meaningless from ~1968 onwards and the NVA had to take over the fighting. You can also look at the British in Malaya, the British in the Boer War (First modern insurgency) or the British in Kenya or the British in Aden or the British in Northern Ireland (Brits are pretty good at COIN), or UNITA getting whipped in Angola once RSA and the Cubans left, or Portugal in Mozambique or Portugal in Angola

lionel4power:
stop expanding it... we are not fools here.
YEAR 2015
your GBADS CONTAIN ONLY
-Starstreak missile =7km
-oerlikon GDF 007 =4km.

nothing else of consequences.
.

Jap, im not arguing , but we're not only talking about Guns and Missiles here, we are talking about some of the most advanced air defence radars in the world.

And only GBADS phase 1 has been completed. GBADS phase 2 will be completed in late 2016 or early 2017 when the Umkhonto SAM system has been completed,all our Oerlikon GDF 007 have been delivered and we receive the RSR-320 radar system, GBADS phase 3 will only be completed around 2019 when we acquire a long range SAM(Most likely the Marlin) ect ect

stillchris:


No. The fact that hasn't changed is that northern Ireland is a part of UK controlled and protected by the british. British troops fought unsuccessfully for 20 years. That's a fact.

Yes they held territory for months and that could be attributed to failed leadership.

Fact of this argument is that insurgency is not an easy war to fight. Whether by a super power of a third world country.

Unsusfully? For 20 years they successfully held Northern Ireland and at no point did the IRA ever capture ground. The IRA where forced to fight like they did because every time it became a battle between them and the British Army they lost. This is not the case in Nigeria where BH as stormed military bases captured towns and drove around in stolen APCs. Britain did far bettet than Nigeria ever did.

So how you can compare the 2 i dont know.

Patchesagain:


Yes, it does matter when YOU ARE FIGHTING AT HOME and they are FIGHTING IN ANOTHER COUNTRY

I am not talking about logistics you slowpoke.

What is france doing? Making arrests and bombing Syria.

You Saffers are borderline retarrds!

-It doesn't matter if a country if fighting at home or abroad when that said country has the single largest force projection in the history of mankind.

- It also doesn't matter if the said country has the largest resources in the history of mankind to deal with the insurgency

- It also doesn't matter if the said country has the single largest intelligence infrastructure in the history of mankind.

- It simply doesn't matter if the said country unilaterally invades other countries and unilaterally suspends the constitution of the country's it invades.


It simply doesn't matter you retarrd.


Making arrests and bombing Syria doesn't end an insurgency, hence the French are in Nigeria begging our Intelligence units to help them build capacity.

Patchesagain:


I did read

That is why I am trying to figure out why you are trying to make such a big deal about it

Typical Nigerian hubris I guess

So your problem isn't reading, it's all in understanding what you've read.

andrewza:


It is British territory as munch as Nigeria, South Africa, India, extra was there territory. Yeah it belonged to them but it was not them. There is a difference. That tiny piece of water separating Ireland from Britain makes a big difference.

It is British territory such that Britain imposed anti terror laws and had the power to deploy whatever tactics and assets they deemed.

That's the difference between fighting home and abroad.

Reason why I used British example.

Reason why everywhere in history claims it was fought by the brush on British boundaries.

A fact you are yet to disproof

Patchesagain:


1. Ireland is a different country - Irish live there, not the English

2. UK WON that war

3. It can be attributed to a failed army

1. No citation. Another proof that you can't read. Argument is northern ireland. Not ireland

2. A war that ended I negotiation is not won by any party. What is wrong with your head

3. No. It can be attributed to failed leadership. The leadership got serious later and all the territories where recovered more quickly that the US retook Fallujah alone in iraq

Henry240:


So your problem isn't reading, it's all in understanding what you've read.

I suspect the guy has mental problem

He'll quote you yet his response will be off

Patchesagain:


I feel nothing

Sharing intelligence is common practice

We have been doing so intensely with the Americans since 9/11

Intelligence sharing =/= capacity building

You claim to feel nothing yet your last part of your comment proves otherwise.

It shows jealousy

stillchris:


It is British territory such that Britain imposed anti terror laws and had the power to deploy whatever tactics and assets they deemed.

That's the difference between fighting home and abroad.

Reason why I used British example.

Reason why everywhere in history claims it was fought by the brush on British boundaries.

A fact you are yet to disproof

Hardly every one since according to Britain it was a internal civil war that Britain was neutral in. They fail at being netrual since one group was pro Britain the othet group anti. And just because it your territory does not mean it in your lands its like saying if some one that invades the Prince Edward Islands is Invading South Africa. Yeah they techical are technical they part of cape town only they 1700km away.

Lesson from South Africa


United Kingdom is not Britain and Britain is not United Kingdom.

What a lesson

andrewza:


Hardly every one since according to Britain it was a internal civil war that Britain was neutral in. They fail at being netrual since one group was pro Britain the othet group anti. And just because it your territory does not mean it in your lands its like saying if some one that invades the Prince Edward Islands is Invading South Africa. Yeah they techical are technical they part of cape town only they 1700km away.

Just because is in your territory doesn't mean is in your land.

Another bomb.

I think we need to tell Turkey just that.