"The Redcoats Are Coming!" Britain Moves Closer To Launching Anti-ISIS Airstrikes In Syria

Tyler Durden's picture

Now that France has officially joined the party in Syria in an effort to avenge the 130 people who lost their lives in Islamic State’s brazen assault on Paris, the odds of World War III have increased exponentially. 

Sure, The Kremlin has for now instructed the military to treat the French as “allies” and for the time being, Moscow’s pilots are writing “For Paris” on bombs, but as Tuesday’s “incident” between Turkish F-16s and a Russian Su-24 makes clear, crowded skies are dangerous skies, especially when there’s a significant amount of ambiguity surrounding what everyone is up to in Syria on a day to day basis. 

Now that Russia has deployed the S-400s to Latakia and placed the Moskva guided missile cruiser equipped with S-300-like systems off the coast, anything that even looks like a threat to Russia’s air force will be “destroyed” and that, as WaPo noted on Wednesday, “has the potential to create headaches for Turkish and other aircraft in a U.S.-led coalition that are carrying out a separate airstrike campaign in Syria."

So, to the extent that the Paris attacks served to thaw tensions between Russia and the West, Turkey’s decision to shoot down an Su-24 means it was one step forward and two steps back. 

Now, it appears the already crowded playing field is about to get more cramped as David Cameron, following up on comments made during meetings with Francois Hollande, is pushing British lawmakers to approve RAF strikes on ISIS. As Reuters reports, the PM “told lawmakers on Thursday it was time to join air strikes against Islamic State militants in Syria, saying Britain cannot ‘subcontract its security to other countries’”.

This is the second time Cameron has sought Parliament’s approval for strikes in Syria. He lost a vote in 2013. 

This time around, the stakes are higher and the circumstances have changed. ISIS has proven resilient thanks in no small part to, i) what looks like a deliberate effort on the part of The Pentagon to avoid hitting Islamic State’s oil convoys, ii) the CIA’s continued support for the various rebel groups that have, for the better part of five years, ensured that the country remains completely unstable, and iii) support from Turkey, the Saudis, and Qatar. 

"It is wrong for the United Kingdom to expect the aircrews of other nations to carry the burdens and the risks of striking ISIL in Syria to stop terrorism here in Britain," Cameron said. 

In a testament to how close Britain is to joining the fray, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn will reportedly not use a party whip to influence MP’s decisions. "In these sort of issues of conscience it is better to allow MPs to make their own minds up," John McDonnell told BBC.

"I don't think this is a country that lets others like the French or the Americans defend our interests and protect us from terrorist organizations - we should contribute to that effort,” Finance minister George Osborne added, underscoring the perception that Britain’s military prowess is but a shadow of what it once was. 

Cameron played down the idea that striking ISIS in Raqqa would increase the extent to which the group targets Britain. "He told MPs the UK was already a target for IS - and the only way to deal with that was to 'take action' now," BBC reports, adding that The Foreign Affairs Committee has said they'll be "no military intervention without a "coherent international strategy" on tackling IS and ending Syria's civil war."

Yeah, well good luck on that. There are two "strategies", one pursued by Russia and Iran, and the other by the US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Moscow and Tehran will simply destroy anyone and everyone battling the Assad government and that includes ISIS, while the US and its regional allies will continue to fund the FSA and, indirectly al-Qaeda while covertly doing what they can to ensure that strikes against ISIS don't cripple the group's ability to remain operational and effective in Syria and Iraq. France, frankly, is just flying around aimlessly dropping bombs wherever the US tells it to which is precisely what the UK will end up doing should they decide to get involved directly.

The problem here is that France and Britain are just bolt-on air forces. Unless and until the US decides to drop its support for the programs and countries that are arming and financing the FSA, al-Nusra, and ISIS, adding more planes will do nothing to aid in the fight against terror and will only make the airspace more crowded, making it even more difficult for the Russians to determine who is who and which planes represent a threat and which ones don't. 

Finally, note that the tensions between Turkey and Russia will make the ongoing discussions in Vienna unbearable for Moscow and Ankara which means that any "progress" on a "political solution" probably crashed and burned with the Su-24 that went down near the Turkish border on Tuesday.

*  *  * 

Meanwhile, in Aleppo...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
dogismycopilot's picture

The question is, who will they be bombing! 

Truther's picture

One wrong move by the UK and it's a radiated turkish jet blown to pieces.

MANvsMACHINE's picture

"He told MPs the UK was already a target for IS - and the only way to deal with that was to 'take action' now"

The only way to deal with?

I've heard a reading of this script somewhere before.

Looney's picture

So, THEY have the S-400’s.

WE should send a couple of Zamboni’s.  ;-)


Handful of Dust's picture

Youse guys are soooo jaded. Turkey is a solid ZATO partner and close friend of France.



Turkish Soccer Fans Boo During Minute Of Silence Honoring France





Who knows, France [instead of Russia] may drop a few on Ankara just to show their appreciated friendship?


redpill's picture

Brits just couldn't stand it any more, they want some of that delicious blowback too.

Supafly's picture

This has become a pissing match in a shot glass.

HenryHall's picture

Yep, the Brits just signed up for a Paris-style event in London.

Q. How stupid can a people get?

A. Cameron-stupid or Ukraine-stupid. Hard to tell!

eforce's picture

They need it to push Snoopers Charter 2.0 through.

knukles's picture

Pile on, now that everybody's there! 
Me me me me me me me
Me too, come on, gimme gimme gimme
                              Seriously?  Seriously retarded.  Idiots.

HowdyDoody's picture

The British were up to their necks in regime change in Libya (a group of SAS in native clothing were caught escorting a 'diplomat' - probably MI6 contact for al Qaeda or whatever) followed by the arms transfer from Libya to Syria. A French diplomat claimed they have been involved in instigating regime change in Syria from 2006. A British Army Chinook helicopter crashed in an Israeli minefield in the West Bank on a 'routine' flight from Amman to Cyprus in 2013. About this time, people from what was to be ISIS bragged they were being trained in Amman.


Cameron is a full-on Zionist stooge. There is even a Rothschild in the government or as advisor.

So British bombing of ISIS sounds totally legit (/sarc)


God's picture

GOD loves:
and DAESH.

Come'on boys, bring some excitement to the Homeland.

Tarshatha's picture

The only risk to combating ISIS is NATO (Turkey) stabbing you in the back!

Surviver22's picture
Surviver22 (not verified) God Nov 26, 2015 4:53 PM

It's the greatest threat global security has ever faced.

All the weapons in the world won't matter once ISIS army kick into gear!


MalteseFalcon's picture

This is the last gasp of the Thatcher era and the English "Empire", so Thatcherites should really whoop it up. 

The real power in England has tipped their hand by joining the AIIB.

Just waiting for Israel to switch sides and then England will follow closely behind.  A defeat in Syria will probably do the trick.

ZippyDooDah's picture

It's very likely the real target of British forces will not be ISIS. Brits are probably planning to join with the U.S. to elbow out the Russians and enforce a no-fly zone. Which of course would only advantage the jihadists. So much for enhancing Brit security. Cameron is a lying asshole and the British parliament should know that by now.

HenryHall's picture

When the time is right Syria will impose a no-fly zone.

Only flights coordinated with Syria are allowed in Syrian airspace West of a certain longitude. Others get shot down.

Blankone's picture

And Iraq and Libya are also waiting for the right time for imposing a no fly zone. 

This thread is already populated with wild claims about what Russia is going to do (someday), how they are about to do something (some year), and on and on.  What Russia should do, how committed Russia is to going all in and so on.

Russia is getting squeezed in Syria because Russia is too afraid to confront NATO. 

Notice how the "do not anger the bear" people have turned into claiming Putins nonresponse is a great chess move.  If he does not grow a pair Putin will be pushed out of Crimea. 

bbq on whitehouse lawn's picture

Russia is not the one getting squeezed, thats our life expectency you see.
Who will be the one to surrender the US and Company or Russia and its alies? Someone will need to back off or there will be a war between them.
Clearly you believe that Russia has the option to leave Syria.

Blankone's picture

By Russia and its allies, you must mean Iraq, Libya, Syria, Serbia, Yemen --- how is that working out?

Russia's actions show they have kept the back door open so they can leave.  They delayed until Syria was almost expended, they still refuse to give Syria the S300 systems, they still have not declared a no fly zone, they cannot react to their airliner being shot down, or their fighter jet being shot down, they have not reacted to the statements that NATO may soon put boots on the ground to "occupy and govern".

It is also clear Putin is just reacting and did not plan for some of these actions.

Blankone's picture

Putin should have been able to forsee how unstable his relationship with Turkey was and never planed to risk such a pipeline.

Russia should have had an efficient pipeline to China years ago.  Not building it is due to not looking ahead and only reacting once in a bind.

Latina Lover's picture

The Brits should be bombing Ankara since Turkey is a major sponsor of ISIS terrorism against Syria. Instead Britain will bomb empty buildings after giving the terrorists 45 minutes warning.

Truther's picture

Agree LL. This may just turn out a major cluster fuck blown out of the air...errrr, I mean proportion.

halcyon's picture

Everybody and their Grandma is bombing ISIS.

I am waiting for the official ISIS Twitter channel to announce that ISIS will start bombinb ISIS.

And media gobbles this up like cotton candy crack...


Usurious's picture
Usurious (not verified) halcyon Nov 26, 2015 9:25 AM

rape pillage and plunder..........

RealityCheque's picture

I'm thinking of bombing ISIS. Maybe sometime next week.....

StychoKiller's picture

Yo, leave some for Luxembourg! :>D

BeansMcGreens's picture

1st Lt. Milo Minderbinder: We're gonna come out of this war rich! 
Yossarian: You're gonna come out rich. We're gonna come out dead. 

o r c k's picture

I was wondering where Granma was.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

"The British are coming the British are coming!"

So... One* if by Air, two* if Sea?

* Hour warning

holgerdanske's picture

David Cameron. Isn't he the chap that performed lewd acts with the head of a dead animal?

That is going to go down well with the IS!



smacker's picture

"David Cameron. Isn't he the chap that performed lewd acts with the head of a dead animal?"

I think Cameron first performed lewd acts with Rebekka Brooks, ex-editor of The Sun tabloid. The pig came later ... ;-)

holgerdanske's picture

So moving up in the world, is he?

Noplebian's picture
Noplebian (not verified) dogismycopilot Nov 26, 2015 12:38 PM
WW3 – Turkey/ISIS/Russia – The Countdown Has Begun......


SoilMyselfRotten's picture

They're not going to be happy until it's a boiling cauldron

Truther's picture

And tomorrow you'll hear about Germany pitching in too. The thing to watch here after Saudi has been implicated in serious attacks, funding the terrrists, arming the devil's angels, and the response they will get from Iran and Russia once they decide that enough is enough. The oil fields are looking mighty quiet these days.

Max Steel's picture

They are not there to fight terrorism. All of them ARE enablers of terrorism, either consciously or not. 

JustObserving's picture

Please - UK was involved in the training of ISIS.  Now what is this talk of attacking ISIS?

ISIS: The jihadist movement stamped “Made in America”

For three years, the US, along with the Gulf states and Turkey, poured billions into “opposition” groups, supposedly to unnamed “moderates,” but in reality to Al Qaeda-linked Sunni groups such as al-Nusra and ISIS to spearhead a sectarian war. The US, Turkey and Jordan have operated a base in Jordan where US instructors trained dozens of ISIS members. In an article last year, the New York Times confirmed that the CIA assisted Arab governments and Turkey by airlifting weaponry to these groups in Jordan and Turkey. The Guardian reported last March that British and French instructors were also involved.



nosam's picture

"Attacking ISIS" is NATO code for attacking Russia/Assad and gaining control of Syria.

"Attacking Al Qaida" is NATO code for gaining control of Afghanistan.

Its quite simple really when you get the hang of it.

Urban Redneck's picture

The "for three years" [before 2014 when the article was written] is misleading.  The Brits have been financing destabilization and regime change efforts against Assad in Syria since at least 2009, and arguably before the USSA ramped up its efforts. 

Ghordius's picture

+1 further, the argument itself is if not misleading, at least not complete. only because X and Y support rebel group Z does not mean that they won't dispose of Z, later

and that can even happen in domestic politics. when the brownshirt SA became ideologically unsound and too difficult to control, mere brawlers looking for a fight, any fight... the black uniformed SS had to dispose of them, for the greater glory of the Reich

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Are you suggesting, (other objectives aside), that those powers that created the various Jihadist Frankensteins, want to have them gather in one place (Syria), so they can get rid of them?

Ghordius's picture

it's not my suggestion. though recently the Telegraph quoted Putin expressing this exact feeling. of wanting to bomb Russians that joined jihadist grops in Syria before they come back to Russia

my impression is that it's mostly "regional allies" that are luring in most of the wannabee jihadists. I can follow ZH's theories of the CIA and Mossad being involved, but I can also imagine them being only tangentially involved. like parachuting ammo, the equivalent of not starting a fire but throwing a molotov cocktail or two in the existing fire someone else started

the whole Iraq "nation building" exercise was, though, the equivalent of reducing a house into easily flammable kindling, starting with the "de-Ba'athification" program, imho

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Creator's Remorse.

Not the first time this has happened, or will happen.

Imagine if you created the human species (genetic tinkering): Perhaps you'd wonder at times, what you have wrought.

RealityCheque's picture

You're giving them too much credit.

It's much less correcting a mistake as it is covering up their dirty deeds.

Ghordius's picture

the "Judean-Christian-Muslim" sole Creator made angels, first. and then made something... more in His Image. to the point that a faction of angels rebelled

further, according to the writing all three main monotheistic religions follow, man was created first... but there was still lots of drama missing in the picture

Blackfox's picture

From one of Britains MSM newspapers last year: A secret plan to train a 100,000-strong rebel army to wage war on Syria's President Bashar Assad was drawn up by a leading British general, according to a report.