By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I don't know why we bother with The U.N, or the chemical investigator mobs. Just send a few of the posters off this here thread, they'll have the answers by tea time, they've got most of them now anyway.
Not if it was the dream ticket of Daniel Radcliffe and Mel Brooks at the helm, Bluey.
Leafing through the last half dozen pages, mate, it’s puzzling me as to why you have become the bad guy all of a sudden; how the Hell did that happen?
I'll take a stab at why Loh...
This is a Swansea City supporters forum, he is a vermin c*nt and always thinks he's correct on every and any subject that comes up on here.
Me personally, i could never take the side of one of those lot, over another Jack, even when i knew that the Jack was in the wrong, i'd still back him to the hilt over one of those lot. I know you don't get that, maybe the football/tribalism isn't as important to you, as it is to many others? You may say that you're intelligent enough to rise above it, you may say that I, and others like me are bitter and twisted?
Long and short of it is, he isn't one of us, so f*ck him and his views.
I want a mate like Flashberryjacks, who wears a Barnsley jersey with "Swans are my second team" on the back.
This is a Swansea City supporters forum, he is a vermin c*nt and always thinks he's correct on every and any subject that comes up on here.
Me personally, i could never take the side of one of those lot, over another Jack, even when i knew that the Jack was in the wrong, i'd still back him to the hilt over one of those lot. I know you don't get that, maybe the football/tribalism isn't as important to you, as it is to many others? You may say that you're intelligent enough to rise above it, you may say that I, and others like me are bitter and twisted?
Long and short of it is, he isn't one of us, so f*ck him and his views.
Love you too.
Just smile.
-1
Syria World War 3 on 15:14 - Apr 15 with 2337 views
People like DJack are sheep and they want to close down debate.
[Post edited 15 Apr 2018 10:40]
I've debated with everyone on this thread you only say that I wish to close down the debate because i've either successfully demonstrated your points as flawed and/or I've generally called the correct facts/event...Awkward.
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
0
Syria World War 3 on 15:32 - Apr 15 with 2300 views
This is a Swansea City supporters forum, he is a vermin c*nt and always thinks he's correct on every and any subject that comes up on here.
Me personally, i could never take the side of one of those lot, over another Jack, even when i knew that the Jack was in the wrong, i'd still back him to the hilt over one of those lot. I know you don't get that, maybe the football/tribalism isn't as important to you, as it is to many others? You may say that you're intelligent enough to rise above it, you may say that I, and others like me are bitter and twisted?
Long and short of it is, he isn't one of us, so f*ck him and his views.
Oh, because Owen Jones had been tweeting the very point you made since the news of the action broke.
Anyway, back to the point - I disagree. As I said, I believe May should have consulted parliament on this particular issue, but she had a mandate to act if she so desired. Which is why she was able to act. If she had no mandate, she couldn't have ordered the action.
We give certain authorities to the executive. We don't give them less or more due to their majority. If you follow that argument through, you'd say that a PM with a large majority doesn't need to consult parliament about anything at all. They could all take time off and allow everything through by RP.
Moral authority is a different matter, as you well know. And your original post didn't mention it. I personally believe that government should have to consult parliament to authorise military action unless the UK is under imminent threat. In other words, I think we should modify the mandate that currently exists.
I couldn’t agree less and the point about larger majorities is silly. Governments with shopping majorities command the confidence of parliament by virtue of having that majority. That doesn’t mean that they can or should bypass Parliament ( although both Blair and thatcher did for the most part) but they derive authority of knowing that when they do go to parliament the governments will mostly always take prevails. But they still have to go to parliament. This government can have no confidence or authority in its use of the royal prerogative because it doesn’t command a majority in Parliament. Anyway, we agree on the main point. Military action should never be taken without the express approval of parliament. The reason May didn’t ask parliament is knew she wouldn’t win.
Syria World War 3 on 06:11 - Apr 15 by Kilkennyjack
Why are you so DESPERATE to close down debate...? You bury your head in the sand if you want to.
In summary ...we have the most useless PM ever, leading a minority Tory govt that has tried to avoid due parliamentary scrutiny on brexit, has tried to avoid due parliamentary scrutiny on Syria, and has cabinet members who appear to have illegally broken electoral spending rules for Brexit vote. Somehow these dreadful people are in charge of the uk. The DUP bribe with our money is as naked as it gets.
They use people like you. Wrap themselves in the union jack/butchers apron, and tell you the moon is made of cheese and you would be immediately arguing the case against science.
Why would Russia try and fail to kill two people on uk soil with a unique agent that they know will lead directly to them ? It makes no sense. And our experts then left 2 hamsters and a cat in sealed house by mistake. And then incinerated the bodies with undue haste.
Did the cat do it ?
Why are you so DESPERATE to close down debate...? You bury your head in the sand if you want to. It's you who bury's your head...In Twitter conspiracy/contrarian postinjgs.
In summary ...we have the most useless PM ever, leading a minority Tory govt that has tried to avoid due parliamentary scrutiny on brexit, has tried to avoid due parliamentary scrutiny on Syria, and has cabinet members who appear to have illegally broken electoral spending rules for Brexit vote. Somehow these dreadful people are in charge of the uk. The DUP bribe with our money is as naked as it gets. I agree with all of this
They use people like you. Wrap themselves in the union jack/butchers apron, and tell you the moon is made of cheese and you would be immediately arguing the case against science. HAHA the only person who has argued against science in this thread is you! I wondered how long it would be before you trotted out "the union jack/butchers apron" - this is the source of your biases. For the record for the Gulf War my views changed with time until just before it happened then I was AGAINST. Bosnia, I was for intervention but the UN messed it up and NATO recovered it. Gulf War 2 - AGAINST as I knew the premise for it was false. That or we should have fulfilled the aims the first time round as that would have had some legitimacy. Syria, I've already posted that action, if any, should await the OPCW survey. Yemen, tell the whole fücking world that it is wrong - UN or a fully funded AU mission should be put in place. Finally as a reminder as this section is largish... ONLY YOU have argued the case against science.
Why would Russia try and fail to kill two people on uk soil with a unique agent that they know will lead directly to them ? The possible answers to this have been posted a few times on this very thread and I believe on the others - Short answer Russia thought it could get away with it. It makes no sense. As to it making no sense to you, well I think that is down to your narrow perspectives.And our experts then left 2 hamsters and a cat in sealed house by mistake. And then incinerated the bodies with undue haste. An odd one , unfortunate/ probably trivial but one that has been amplified by Russia and the tinfoil brigade. I will attribute cocküp rather than malfeasance BUT I'm keeping an open mind.
Did the cat do it ? Your debating skills are awesome, NOT. That said I don't believe that the cat or the other animals were a vector in this case.
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
0
Syria World War 3 on 15:57 - Apr 15 with 2256 views
I've debated with everyone on this thread you only say that I wish to close down the debate because i've either successfully demonstrated your points as flawed and/or I've generally called the correct facts/event...Awkward.
If somebody makes a post you don't like you get abusive.
Continually being banned by Planet Swans for Porthcawl and then being reinstated.
This is a Swansea City supporters forum, he is a vermin c*nt and always thinks he's correct on every and any subject that comes up on here.
Me personally, i could never take the side of one of those lot, over another Jack, even when i knew that the Jack was in the wrong, i'd still back him to the hilt over one of those lot. I know you don't get that, maybe the football/tribalism isn't as important to you, as it is to many others? You may say that you're intelligent enough to rise above it, you may say that I, and others like me are bitter and twisted?
Long and short of it is, he isn't one of us, so f*ck him and his views.
I shared a chutney tray with two West Ham fans and a Gooner last night. I’m a paragon of sporting tolerance, me.
An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it.
0
Syria World War 3 on 16:12 - Apr 15 with 2226 views
Morocco and Tunisia has synagogues, Iran might not be Arab but has lots of synagogue's.
[Post edited 15 Apr 2018 17:58]
Correct but Tunisia and Egypt are not "hardline". Tunisia does(did?) have a small Islamist problem but has generally been stable. Egypt was the first Arab nation to form ties with Israel and generally has good ties, not forgetting it also has Coptic Christians (who have unfortunately been targeted by Islamists). Admittedly Sisi has been clamping down to consolidate his power but Egypt is not (yet?) "hardline". Iran's synagogues pre-date it's post revolutionary state and even today it is a bit of a curates egg... women have never been forced to wear a niqab and generally most of them just wear a headscarve. Also Iran is a nation with one of , if not the highest incidences of cosmetic surgery - plenty of non-hardline freedoms.
Ultimately, my post was a flippant reply to an idiotic post. I suspect that you are intelligent enough to realise this and it makes your feeble attempt to undermine me even more sad.
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
0
Syria World War 3 on 18:10 - Apr 15 with 2078 views
Morocco and Tunisia has synagogues, Iran might not be Arab but has lots of synagogue's.
[Post edited 15 Apr 2018 17:58]
Tunisia - about 1700 Jews left. For comparison, there's around 800 in Cardiff. Plenty left for Israel and France. The number of synagogues isn't that big. Wouldn't really call Tunisia a hard line nation either.
Iran - 25k Jews in 2009 down to less than 9k in 2012, almost certainly far less now. Given persecution of Jews there ( government decide who run Jewish schools - almost always appointing Muslims, requiring schools open on the Sabbath ) Iran may not be expelling Jews but they certainly aren't made welcome.
0
Syria World War 3 on 18:42 - Apr 15 with 2041 views
I couldn’t agree less and the point about larger majorities is silly. Governments with shopping majorities command the confidence of parliament by virtue of having that majority. That doesn’t mean that they can or should bypass Parliament ( although both Blair and thatcher did for the most part) but they derive authority of knowing that when they do go to parliament the governments will mostly always take prevails. But they still have to go to parliament. This government can have no confidence or authority in its use of the royal prerogative because it doesn’t command a majority in Parliament. Anyway, we agree on the main point. Military action should never be taken without the express approval of parliament. The reason May didn’t ask parliament is knew she wouldn’t win.
She wouldn't win.
I find it difficult to judge whether she should or not. Hate any military action and don't think there are any 'good guys' involved in any of this. Plus it's bound to be a disaster.
But equally feel very uncomfortable at what's happening there and whether it's morally ok to sit back and watch. It's very difficult, and I remain confused by how anyone on either side of the decision can be so adamant.
One thing I do know, is that the hawks saying Trump / May / Macron are absolutely 100% correct and are justifying that position by declaring how much they care about the people of Syria, are, in many cases, the same ones who've been horrified at the thought of the UK and the US taking refugees.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
