Syria air strikes

[Tangled up in Blue]

]I am not sure if bombing ISIS will achieve the defeat of the ideology, unlikely really[/B].
BUT doing nothing offensive against them IS likely to allow them to grow and spread.

Certainly the war on that abstract noun terror didn't end that well.

Edit.I agree with your second point, however.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Eh? I'm saying exactly the opposite. KL was blaming Blair for a war, and by extension the 7/7 bombings. I'm saying you can't say that because you don't know they didn't stop other attacks, and moreover, the attacks had nothing to do with the war.

Moreover, if you read the independent article you'll see that the terrorists that carried out the bombings made videos that contradict what KL said.

Either way, I've just been watching a small part of the debate live on TV, and it has restored my faith in the political system of this country. There's no shouting, there's no waiving of papers, there's no insults, there's just a group of about 600 people having a very serious and intelligent debate about a very important subject, and everyone is showing everyone else the respect they deserve.

When it really matters our MPs really do it right.

I saw most of the first two hours and I can't agree.It was quite obvious that some MP's were repeatedly asking JC to stand down in a deliberate attempt to stop him putting across his oppostion to the bombing.Willam Rees Mogg's intervention in particular was the worst sort of poltical point scoring.

 

[rigsby]

I'd suggest you calm down a bit.
We aren't changing the world on here it's just a discussion between people who support the same football team. If someone has taken the trouble to reply to your post with an opinion rather than an insult it makes this place run better if you reply in a similar way.

Just in time one of the 3 comrades comes to the rescue.
Who says I'm not calm or is that an insult.
It would also be better if you didn't take the last line of a debate and twist it to suit your own agenda because that makes you sound like.....a politician.

Perhaps MK might like to take your advice on board and not tell everyone who tries to make a point that their wrong. Fine if you don't want to bomb.... I prefer drones myself and I certainly don't want troops on the ground for many reasons. But at least offer some alternatives.

You cant just blame past Western policy ( who wouldn't change that if they could). But there is no point in standing on the deck of the sinking Titanic, telling everyone that it was wrong to have sailed in the first place.

 

[Uncle Leo]

.Willam Rees Mogg's intervention in particular was the worst sort of poltical point scoring.

And from beyond the grave too.

 

[Napster]

And from beyond the grave too.

booom! #fistpump

 

[Uncle Leo]

 

[MK Shrimper]

Rigsby, you ask me questions that I can't possibly answer and when I ask you the same you sidestep them. People are quite happy to tell me I'm wrong, but when I point out a flaw in their grand plan I get torn to shreds.

I don't need saving by ***, TUIB or anyone thanks but these political threads are just turning into head banging and quite frankly it's getting quite boring. None of us can make any difference, we're just droning on and internet forum.

So I shall limit my SZ fun to anything but the Politics forum, at least for awhile.

 

[rigsby]

I don't claim to be any kind of expert. I've heard those that are state that indiscriminate bombing in Syria will make the situation worse. And of course, like any other evidence that's provided to any Government they will ignore it if it doesn't fit their wider plans and how the voting public are convinced is the right course of action.

So Rigsby, if we bomb bomb and bomb again and another Paris happens on the streets of Europe or America (lets hope not but I have a horrible feeling it's just a matter of time) what then?

I have stated that I am against bombing in its current form. A year ago we couldn't make our minds up whether to bomb Assad or bomb the rebels. Now we've settled for bombing ISIS. When London is attacked it will have been Planned long before we have even considered bombing Syria.

We have been far to soft on preachers of hate. We have allowed people to recruit openly in this country. It has flourished in our prisons. Not done enough to stop the funding of terrorism. Allowed travel to Syria so they could train in camps. Allowed them back far to easily. Like every country we have taken the soft option with the migrant crisis in Greece.
The guns are here and so are the bullets so are the people who will carry out the attack and no doubt they are on someones list as we speak.

Only a year ago we had politicians talking about retraining returning Jihadi's so that the could have a place in our society. Of course they will say its because we bombed other Muslims but that's letting them off far to easily. They don't mind murdering other Muslims or women and children because of the slightest excuse. I find it strange that people on here are happy to make the same excuse for them.

When we are all glued to the TV watching the death toll rise in London desperately trying to contact our families, while my other half goes into melt down whilst her children don't answer. Its best you don't come on here and blame the west or make excuses for what's going on.

 

[londonblue]

I saw most of the first two hours and I can't agree.It was quite obvious that some MP's were repeatedly asking JC to stand down in a deliberate attempt to stop him putting across his oppostion to the bombing.Willam Rees Mogg's intervention in particular was the worst sort of poltical point scoring.

Yeah, after I went back to it (after my post) it did get a bit more heated, and yes, the speaker did have to intervene a few times. However, it wasn't as raucous as the chamber often is, and it came over more as a passionate debate rather than a bunch of adults acting like children, which it often does...

After having watched the news it seems Camerscum was also given a hard time.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

We have been far to soft on preachers of hate. We have allowed people to recruit openly in this country. It has flourished in our prisons. Not done enough to stop the funding of terrorism. Allowed travel to Syria so they could train in camps. Allowed them back far to easily. Like every country we have taken the soft option with the migrant crisis in Greece.
The guns are here and so are the bullets so are the people who will carry out the attack and no doubt they are on someones list as we speak.

Only a year ago we had politicians talking about retraining returning Jihadi's so that the could have a place in our society. Of course they will say its because we bombed other Muslims but that's letting them off far to easily. They don't mind murdering other Muslims or women and children because of the slightest excuse. I find it strange that people on here are happy to make the same excuse for them.

If we are at war, these people are treasonous and ought to be tried, convicted and sentenced as such. They should lose their citzen rights too.
And also their supporters - family or otherwise - WAR is not a computer game.

 

[mrsblue]

Turkey should stop buying oil from IS and selling arms to IS!

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

And from beyond the grave too.

Ha! I meant his scumbag son!

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

It seems a finely balanced decision to me

Positives

Will increase sales of British arms manufacturers
Will make people who say "we must do something" feel better
It can't fail as there's no actual military objective to it
Bombing the crap out of people's homes will increase the number of refugees, so we will get more migrants, which means we'll be able to get a budget surplus sooner

Negatives

Will make Britain less safe
Bombing polarises opinion and will radicalise young, dissatisfied Muslims
Will require extra funding at time of budget cuts
Increased NHS costs from people banging their head against the wall in frustration at not learning from previous mistakes

 

[Floval Flyer]

Bombing Syria...

Do we, don't we bomb Daesh ? (fka ISIS, ISIL, IS etc...)

Big vote pending tonight.



I believe we must do something, doing nothing is not an option, however the targets need to be strategic and primary targets need to be their income - I've: oil supply, bleed them dry of funding, then missile strikes followed by co-ordinated ground troops, US / EU coalition

anyone...

 

[MK Shrimper]

Big thread in the politics area mate.

 

[Pubey]

Why isn't 'do nothing' an option?

 

[manor15]

Seems they've voted in favour.

397 ayes, 223 noes.

 

[SonicShrimper]

Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to war we go... again... three in 14 years now. Bloody idiots. "We can barely support ourselves in our own yard, let's send yet more troops halfway around the world just before Christmas! What a,wonderful idea!"

Bloody idiots.

 

[Floval Flyer]

Big thread in the politics area mate.

sorry, completely forgot about the Politics forum.. Thanks :smile:

 

[callan]

So it's now official we are a at war with the Syrian branch of Isis, did any of our politicians do a good job here?
They were all thoroughly unconvincing whether for or against.