The Obama administration began to reengage in Iraq with a series of airstrikes aimed at ISIS beginning on 10 August 2014. On 9 September 2014 President Obama said that he had the authority he needed to take action to destroy the militant group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, citing the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, and thus did not require additional approval from Congress. The following day on 10 September 2014 President Barack Obama made a televised speech about ISIL, which he stated "Our objective is clear: We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy". Obama has authorized the deployment of additional U.S. Forces into Iraq, as well as authorizing direct military operations against ISIL within Syria. On the night of 21/22 September the United States, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE, Jordan and Qatar started air attacks against ISIS in Syria.[citation needed]
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): Which countries worked together to bomb ISIS on Sep 21-22, 2014?
Ah, so.. the United States, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE, Jordan and Qatar

The use of the word "heresy" was given wide currency by Irenaeus in his 2nd century tract Contra Haereses (Against Heresies) to describe and discredit his opponents during the early centuries of the Christian community.[citation needed] He described the community's beliefs and doctrines as orthodox (from ὀρθός, orthos "straight" + δόξα, doxa "belief") and the Gnostics' teachings as heretical.[citation needed] He also pointed out the concept of apostolic succession to support his arguments.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): Who gave more exposure to the term heresy when attempting to descredit opponents during the early centuries of Christianity?
Ah, so.. Irenaeus

Regardless, the Luftwaffe could still inflict huge damage. With the German occupation of Western Europe, the intensification of submarine and air attack on Britain's sea communications was feared by the British. Such an event would have serious consequences on the future course of the war, should the Germans succeed. Liverpool and its port became an important destination for convoys heading through the Western Approaches from North America, bringing supplies and materials. The considerable rail network distributed to the rest of the country. Operations against Liverpool in the Liverpool Blitz were successful. Air attacks sank 39,126 long tons (39,754 t) of shipping, with another 111,601 long tons (113,392 t) damaged. Minister of Home Security Herbert Morrison was also worried morale was breaking, noting the defeatism expressed by civilians. Other sources point to half of the port's 144 berths rendered unusable, while cargo unloading capability was reduced by 75%. Roads and railways were blocked and ships could not leave harbour. On 8 May 1941, 57 ships were destroyed, sunk or damaged amounting to 80,000 long tons (81,000 t). Around 66,000 houses were destroyed, 77,000 people made homeless, and 1,900 people killed and 1,450 seriously hurt on one night. Operations against London up until May 1941 could also have a severe impact on morale. The populace of the port of Hull became 'trekkers', people who underwent a mass exodus from cities before, during, and after attacks. However, the attacks failed to knock out or damage railways, or port facilities for long, even in the Port of London, a target of many attacks. The Port of London in particular was an important target, bringing in one-third of overseas trade.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): How much of the overseas trade did the Port of London take on?
Ah, so..
one-third of overseas trade