Forum | Cor Blimey may have a point. by pomanjou

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread

Cor Blimey may have a point. 13:58 - Nov 27 with 14829 views

What are Mr Camerons compelling reasons for needing a mandate to bomb Syria?

He said some days ago live on camera that USA, France and Russia were all bombing and that we really should be doing our bit. We all know that our bit is actually not a lot and may come to 2/3% of the total if/when we do join the bombfest. We are not needed.

So Camerons flaky excuse, sorry, compelling reason is that they are doing it, therefore so should we. In the circumstances Corbyn is right to raise questions about justification.

Hopefully Corbyn, the conservatives not very secret weapon, will maintain his position as labour leader and the main reason for voting conservative. What a pity it will be if at his labour meetings on Monday he decides to fall on his sword. A man of his honour, boxing way above his weight, should surely do just that.

I'm very pro Cameron and the conservatives generally but I reckon they are being a bit gung ho in this instance.

	Currently residing in Pinner, Centre of the Universe.
Poll:	we have a timetable for Brexit, should there be a referendum for the English

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:16 - Nov 27 with 9240 views

BazzaInTheLoft

He'll get his mandate don't worry my Tory friend.

There'll be a free vote and the red Tories will vote Aye.

Then all will be right in the world unless your attending a Syrian wedding when the RAF mistake the guest's conga line for a ISIS offensive formation.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:20 - Nov 27 with 9227 views

TheBlob

To the victor go the spoils.
If you don't join in you miss out on the divvy up.A bit like Germany in 1944/5.
Unless you've got an uncle called Victor Spoils that is.....

Poll:

So how was the season for you?

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:20 - Nov 27 with 9226 views

Clive_Anderson

Should leave the French and Russians to it.

There is no right moral answer either way though.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:22 - Nov 27 with 9214 views

FDC

Right, because if the last twenty years have taught us anything it's that bombing the middle East is the way to a less dangerous world. There's nothing extremism hates more than children orphaned by Western bombs.

Is the Chilcot Report out yet?

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:22 - Nov 27 with 9210 views

stevec

Yeah, let's join the world's super powers bombing the sh it out of an empty desert and meanwhile leave the borders open for a further influx of jihadis into Europe and the UK.

Cameron needs his fckin head tested.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:23 - Nov 27 with 9202 views

TheBlob

It might seem churlish to turn down the invitation.
Anyway,got to get a few kicks in to the guy lying on the ground.

Poll:

So how was the season for you?

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:26 - Nov 27 with 9182 views

Clive_Anderson

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:22 - Nov 27 by FDC
Right, because if the last twenty years have taught us anything it's that bombing the middle East is the way to a less dangerous world. There's nothing extremism hates more than children orphaned by Western bombs. Is the Chilcot Report out yet?

It's a bit different to Iraq though isn't it?

Place is already a warzone and ISIS are doing some terrible things. Just leave them to get on with it?

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:28 - Nov 27 with 9175 views

BrianMcCarthy

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:16 - Nov 27 by BazzaInTheLoft
He'll get his mandate don't worry my Tory friend. There'll be a free vote and the red Tories will vote Aye. Then all will be right in the world unless your attending a Syrian wedding when the RAF mistake the guest's conga line for a ISIS offensive formation.

Corbyn's been impressive since he came in. Takes real guts to question the West's war on the Middle East. It will cost him, but how much it will cost him will only be found out in time.

Britain's going to bomb Syria. It's inevitable as the U.S. wants it. All this is just a dance.

	"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
Poll:	Player of the Year (so far)

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:31 - Nov 27 with 9156 views

ElHoop

I wouldn't bother either - can't we sit this one out for a change? Other people do. The ones already out there are now shooting down one other, why do we want to add to the confusion?

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:31 - Nov 27 with 9152 views

Discodroids

"oh hello...im looking to locate a complete c unt who must possess the crude bludgeoning political nuances of the Yorkshire Ripper with a half brick, To Lead theonce great Labour Party into the fu cking Void - it is rather old? You do? Oh, oh, oh, that's wonderful...Jemery Corbyn You Say !!."

"my name ?..Oh Yes ,, Mccluskey ......Leonard david Mccluskey.."

[Post edited 27 Nov 2015 14:33]

"...The monkey is never dead, Dealer. The monkey never dies. When you kick him off, he just hides in a corner, waiting his turn."

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:38 - Nov 27 with 9123 views

FDC

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:26 - Nov 27 by Clive_Anderson
It's a bit different to Iraq though isn't it? Place is already a warzone and ISIS are doing some terrible things. Just leave them to get on with it?

ISIS aren't a state (despite the misnomer), they're a loose network, connected by chat rooms and ideology, not geography or physical infrastructure. You can't bomb them off the map.

There isn't leader you can assassinate and it all goes away, people aren't receiving orders from a Jihadi Fuhrer , they're making plans in their bedrooms to perform acts of terrorism in the name of ISIS and being supported by their network. I could go outside right now and do something terrible and leave a message saying it was for ISIS and the news would report an ISIS attack.

The reason their doing it is because of ideology, not because they're soldiers in 20th century, 'conventional' war where we can bomb their HQ and it stops.

Dropping bombs is just something to do in order to be seen to be doing something, for political reasons. Blair got a hard-on for being a "man of history" - and he got that, but the wrong way round. Cameron doesn't have the same inferiority complex, being the Eton lad he is, but it's an easy response born out of not knowing what else to do, that doesn't do anything to make us any safer from Islamic terrorism, quite the opposite.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:44 - Nov 27 with 9097 views

essextaxiboy

I admire Corbyns principles and It does no harm for the reasons for stepping up attacks to be pulled apart for scrutiny , at least then if it goes wrong we cant say we rushed in .

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:45 - Nov 27 with 9092 views

Clive_Anderson

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:38 - Nov 27 by FDC

ISIS doesn't just exist in chatrooms, they are a military group that have legitimate targets that can be bombed.

If bombing isn't the answer then what is? We're agreed ISIS are a problem right?

I'm up for being convinced either way, but I don't understand how standing idly by and letting ISIS commit genocide and behead kids is in any way taking the moral high ground.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:57 - Nov 27 with 9041 views

robith

He needs a mandate because he tried to grandstand bombing Assad through parliament to look good, but lost, and so now can't do so without a parliamentary vote.

Of course if he had have bombed Assad Isis would be running Damascus by now

To be honest airstrikes are a charade as long as

a) Assad is in charge and barrel bombing his own people (killed seven times more civilians than Isis)
b) Syria has no functioning organs and institutions of state
c) Turkey keeps selling their oil for them
d) There is no ground force comprised of regional powers
e) there is a long term UN approved plan of action of how to achieve all the above

We careened once into the Middle East with no long term plan, and here we are dealing with the consequences 12 years later.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:59 - Nov 27 with 9024 views

paulparker

Here's an idea, why don't we deploy our already depleted services on our borders and around our streets and root out the filth that support ISIS already here
id rather that than be dictated to by the Russians and the yanks about where we bomb,
and who we bomb
and being controversial why should we help the French , I seem to recall we needed there assistance a few years back in the middle east and they didn't want to know so let them get on with it

And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles Brian Moore

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:02 - Nov 27 with 9010 views

PunteR

Who started this war? Why are Muslims now taking up arms?.

Occasional providers of half decent House music.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:03 - Nov 27 with 9004 views

robith

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:59 - Nov 27 by paulparker

Also until Paris, Russia wasn't attacking Isis, they were suppressing Anti-Assad rebels

Edit: And if only we'd listened to France then. Saddam was pretty bad, but our removal of him has been an absolute catastrophe

[Post edited 27 Nov 2015 15:24]

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:06 - Nov 27 with 8989 views

BazzaInTheLoft

By the way lets not forget that we (Britain) are already bombing ISIS in Syria so all this bollocks on a football message board and in the news is moot. The fact they are Canadian planes is a technicality.

This vote is a fvcking circus anyway or as Brian rightly put it, a dance.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:07 - Nov 27 with 8984 views

essextaxiboy

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:59 - Nov 27 by paulparker

I think I agree PP . We should protect ourselves here . Find the ones here , moniter them day and night .Prosecute them where possible .Disrupt them all the time, massive de radicalisation programme.. all lots cheaper than a days bombs ..

We may have to give up some freedoms to keep the rest.

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:12 - Nov 27 with 8965 views

FDC

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:45 - Nov 27 by Clive_Anderson
ISIS doesn't just exist in chatrooms, they are a military group that have legitimate targets that can be bombed. If bombing isn't the answer then what is? We're agreed ISIS are a problem right? I'm up for being convinced either way, but I don't understand how standing idly by and letting ISIS commit genocide and behead kids is in any way taking the moral high ground.

I pretty much agree with all of your post, and as such shall mark this day with yearly parades

But...

ISIS doesn't just exist in chatrooms, they are a military group that have legitimate targets that can be bombed.

Of course, I assume you didn't think I meant they don't exist and act within the physical world, right?

We're agreed ISIS are a problem right?

Of course

If bombing isn't the answer then what is?

I don't have an answer, honestly - at least not a short-term solution. A long term solution probably involves all kinds of utopian suggestions, but if we're talking short-term security - I honestly don't know. But that's not a reason to throw our hands up and say "fck this, no idea - shall we trying bombing again? The Sun are up for it." Not only because I think there's strong moral arguements against bombing (everyone remember the USA's "this is the most precise form of warfare mankind has ever seen", shortly before bombing a wedding and a UN hospital?), but because it absolutely achieves less than nothing in my view.

I'm up for being convinced either way, but I don't understand how standing idly by and letting ISIS commit genocide and behead kids is in any way taking the moral high ground.

As above - I get the not wanting to stand around doing part, but the urge to do something even if it is counter-productive should be resisted, surely?

Like you, I'm open to being convinced that this is somehow a wonderfully strategic move.

Slight aside, but there's something deeply rotten about arresting ex-soldiers for going to join the Kurds in their fight against ISIS because they're not an approved opposition force.

EDIT: In all seriousness, with more strategic support the Kurds have the best chance of defeating ISIS on the ground, militarily and ideologically, and establishing a democracy in the region. But Turkey sees them as a threat, and they're a bit lefty so that's no good.

EDIT 2: This is a good video about the Kurds fighting in Syria, worth a watch if you have half an hour

EDIT 3!

Just realised, when you said:

ISIS doesn't just exist in chatrooms, they are a military group that have legitimate targets that can be bombed.

I took you to mean, they themselves have targets which they intend to bomb, but you meant there are legitimate ISIS targets that can be bombed, right?

In which case I'm less convinced by this.

[Post edited 27 Nov 2015 15:27]

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:20 - Nov 27 with 8919 views

daveB

Bombing the middle east for the last 15 years hasn't stopped the war so not sure what the point is of doing it again. Most of the terrorists are in europe anyway so we're not actually killing any of them

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:41 - Nov 27 with 8831 views

LythamR

All bombing does is feed the hatred of the west and helps create more militants either in syria or in bedroooms and chatrooms around the world. is is ineffective. if it worked it would be over by now wouldnt it?

the only way intervention is going to work is with boots on the ground and this should only happen through the UN. boots on the ground supported by air strikes will be effective but it has to be through the UN to have credibility. At the same time we must stop arming and rearming local populations and encouraging them to blow the shit out of each other just so that the wests arms manufacturers have their profits boosted

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 15:50 - Nov 27 with 8810 views

Ingham

Quite so, pom.

Some commentators seem to think the point is that it will be good for Britain. A point not lost on Dave. Whatever all those Iraqi Kurds, Turkish Kurds, Iranian Kurds, Syrian Kurds, Assyrian, Maronite and Syriac Christians, Yazidis, Zoroastrians, Ba'athists, Alawites, the Shia, the Sunna, Hizbollah, Druzes, Islamists of every stripe, not forgetting Hasidim, Haredim, Wahabi Saudis, Marsh Arabs ...

... the locals, in other words, think of the idea. If they notice. Which, as you suggest, is not to be taken for granted.

Oh, sure, ISIL, too. Just fly around, you're bound to hit one. Vlad says he's doing it, but is apparently bombing someone else, Turkey is firing at Vlad, but they say they didn't realise it was him, they were shooting at just anyone, and anyway, Francois has hit them already, but it seems that they were out, although the Americans told him they weren't, so we know Barack can still see the funny side, but, then, he's not being bombed, not yet, at any rate.

Does Dave think that 'good for Britain' - or whatever he thinks - will be sufficient justification if it all goes wrong. Or if it simply has no effect. What then? Does he stop? Can't, really. Can't say there's no point NOW, because everyone will want to know why we thought there was some point before. And if he goes on and it still makes no difference ... ?

Hard to believe with so much enthusiasm from the French, the Turks, Vlad, Al Assad, the Iranian militias, the Kurd, and all the rest of them. Surely that MUST produce some kind of outcome. Not a good one, I'm not saying that. And, given that the Al Aqsa/Temple Mount issue is simmering away nicely, World War Three isn't exactly GUARANTEED ...

Whatever the case, Dave will be the one who has to explain why he did what he did. I'll give him one thing, he's confident. But then, the people running QPR are usually confident ...

Of course, this isn't my main concern. That is that Dave just gets confused. Speeds off in the Davemobile, hits Raqqa at noon, gives al-BAGHDADI the most devastating harangue on reforming the European Union he ever HEARD. And bombs Berlin.

Wouldn't be the first time.

Having helped to bring down Gaddafi, producing unprecedented stability in North, West, Central and East Africa, Dave might achieve anything.

Then again, it might all work out. The FO might get really frisky, and give him THREE maps, then God help Tory Berkshire. Only needs a mosque in Haselmere to declare for the Caliphate? Save money, bomb the UK instead, and bring down net migration all in one go. The Chancellor will be pleased.

And he can't even blame New Labour. Is it necessarily an advantage to have an unelectable opposition, and no-one else to deflect attention from his own policies?

I'd like to hear a coherent analysis of the Middle East first. Not from Dave, we can't expect that. But from anyone in the Middle East. But why, anyway? Is he under the impression that Syria isn't getting enough bombing? You may laugh. But Dave is not the worst case scenario. Mr Abe is keen to put Japan back among the military powers of the world.

Pray God the FO don't send HIM the Map of Syria.

[Post edited 27 Nov 2015 16:29]

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 16:12 - Nov 27 with 8756 views

exiled_dictator

not sure that bombing supposed isis targets in syria will actually achieve anything positive, other than a stiffie for some war mongering tories who have shares or directorships in defence industries.
but something, more than is being currently done, absolutely DOES need to be done to extinguish isis.
i saw a brilliant documentary about 4 years ago about islamic extremism, and it noted that it's european centre was in brussels in the neighbourhood of molenbeek. a muslim journalist interviewed many young muslims who were determined to install sharia law locally, then spread it out through brussels, belgium, holland, muslim parts of france and other countries. they were very determined in their misguided beliefs, and were prepared to die for their cause. very radical and extreme views were motivating them. they mentioned all sorts of justifications including the palestinian situation, the iraq war, toppling of ghaddafi, and anything that they saw as being western values interfering and imposing upon them.
when questioned about their justification of spreading their views and terrorism, they misquoted the KORAN, and spoke of a reverse crusade where christians would be under muslim rule.
it was very scary indeed, and something that was discussed within many communities in london. in this documentary, there was interviews with anjem choudary. now he is a scary character, and he spoke about his beliefs and desires to change the face of london and uk as a whole. he is a very in your face type of argument, who manipulates the law to his favour.
there is definitely a wider network of muslims whose only objective is to cause problems and confrontation. we have had these people trying to impose themselves onto us both in the business and within our religious community. not every muslim welcomes these ideas, or wants to live under a sharia law system.
it is a huge problem, that is getting worse on a daily basis. it was just a matter of time before paris happened, twice. what really astounds me is that after january's attacks at charlie hebdo, france did absolutely NOTHING to resolve the issues. their laissez faire attitude was never going to work or resolve any issues.
the fight against isis is not only in syria or iraq, but on our very streets at home and in the work place. yes we need to resolve the issue in syria and other places around the world, but what about the issue of home grown terrorists and extremism on our very streets? i see no consensus between countries and governments across europe and further as to how we are actually going to win this was. just for the record, i believe that 'we', the normal every day people who want to live in peace and friendly interaction, are LOSING this was against these people.
let me ask you, do people think that drummer lee rugby's terrible murder is anything to do with isis, or were those two twisted individuals following another belief? what about the attacks 7/7? do people see them as part of the same story? or are they just isolated incidents?

i have no idea whether bombing syria, iraq, pakistan, or even terrorists on the streets of london will resolve anything other than make these people more determined. martyrdom is part of their beliefs, so killing them doesn't actually achieve anything as others are waiting in the wings to take over in their place.

some men aren’t looking for anything logical, like money. they can’t be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. some men just want to watch the world burn.

	It's not what you've got; it's where you stick it.
Poll:	Climate Change

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 16:19 - Nov 27 with 8741 views

johncharles

Cor Blimey may have a point. on 14:20 - Nov 27 by TheBlob
To the victor go the spoils. If you don't join in you miss out on the divvy up.A bit like Germany in 1944/5. Unless you've got an uncle called Victor Spoils that is.....

Not to mention Iraq and Libya. Now tell me, what have Iraq, Libya and Syria got a lot of ?

Strong and stable my arse.

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread