OutByEaster? Posted December 1, 2015 Moderator Share Posted December 1, 2015 @Glarmorgan for me, it's part of the same problem, the middle east is a balance of madness and you can't fix any of it without fixing a lot of it. Israel is part of the problem, ISIS is part of the problem, Saudi Arabia is part of the problem, Assad is part of the problem, the problem of the Kurds is part of the problem, Hezbollah are part of the problem, Al Qaeda is part of the problem - it's the same problem and it's all interlinked. Until we start to address the whole problem, killing thousands of people every couple of years isn't going to do anything but make it worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 1, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted December 1, 2015 Isn't it the US tactic for this kind of thing to send in 'military advisors' who happen to like to advise in a very hands on way? Least shocking development ever. Even less shocking than David Cameron chomping at the bit to get some proper showy Statesman work done and none of this tedious domestic lark. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 5 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Who is it in this thread that has said military action isn't part of the solution? Who is it that's offering appeasement? I've missed these posts. It's either bombing civilian areas or sitting down for a cup of tea with ISIS. No other options...apparently. Well that's seemingly the only options currently offered by our politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 The current plans are poor and Cameron's language toward those who disagree with him is frightening and should be a serious cause for concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted December 2, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted December 2, 2015 52 minutes ago, CarewsEyebrowDesigner said: The current plans are poor and Cameron's language toward those who disagree with him is frightening and should be a serious cause for concern. Quick lads, CED's an ISIS sympathiser. Bomb him! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) It would be an interesting experiment for the UK to stand back from attacking ISIS in Syria, just to see if not bombing Syrians prompts the radicalised not to commit acts of terror on British soil or if it makes no difference. Some countries do seem to be less of a target than others and you can't help but wonder why we can't be one of them. There is no hurry to get involved and should the experiment prove once for all that there is no link between terrorist attacks and military intervention, then we could always join in later. I suspect that the vote will go in favour of some more war and then when there is an act of terror in the UK, they will tell us, that this was the threat they went to war to defeat, and enough people will believe that logic. Edited December 2, 2015 by MakemineVanilla 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 1 hour ago, choffer said: Quick lads, CED's an ISIS sympathiser. Bum him! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 I find it very hard to believe that there have been no civilian casualties in Iraq from British bombs, as Cameron is claiming. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 4 minutes ago, Davkaus said: I find it very hard to believe that there have been no civilian casualties in Iraq from British bombs, as Cameron is claiming. I don't believe a word that comes out of that clearings in the woods mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 11 minutes ago, Wainy316 said: I don't believe a word that comes out of that clearings in the woods mouth. He's incredibly keen to push this through and I'm not exactly sure why....? More passionate about this than anything else I've seen him propose. Even to the point of utter bullshit like the claim above about bombs in Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 16 minutes ago, Davkaus said: I find it very hard to believe that there have been no civilian casualties in Iraq from British bombs, as Cameron is claiming. probably a perverse interpretation of the word civilian. If having alternative views makes you a terrorist sympathiser in his words, no doubt a civilian has been reframed to mean a baluga whale. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 1 minute ago, Rodders said: probably a perverse interpretation of the word civilian. If having alternative views makes you a terrorist sympathiser in his words, no doubt a civilian has been reframed to mean a baluga whale. Or maybe British "made" bombs, maybe we get them in from overseas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Cameron only cares about looking big and tough on the world stage. He puts on a good performance, I'll give him that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 1 minute ago, CarewsEyebrowDesigner said: Cameron only cares about looking big and tough on the world stage. He puts on a good performance, I'll give him that. And then you look at him and think "Aww, look at the little scamp thinking he is at home playing with his Action Men" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 2, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted December 2, 2015 2 minutes ago, Genie said: He's incredibly keen to push this through and I'm not exactly sure why....? More passionate about this than anything else I've seen him propose. Even to the point of utter bullshit like the claim above about bombs in Iraq. Cameron loves being able to show what an important statesman he is, and the ultimate stage for a statesman is apparently conflict. You can tell he hates the humdrum day to day stuff, he treats it largely with disdain, but if it's some grand event he can claim to have had a hand in and stand next to the US President he's all over it. He also, in this case, is particularly pushing because the last time he lost the debate, which is one of the more embarrassing moments for a PM in history. He can't have it happen again. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 I'm not sure what the problem with just watching is? It saves us a fortune and potentially makes us less likely to be attacked. I'm sure between Russia, France and others they have it under control (not that there seems to be much of a strategy aside from blowing up 'targets'. Leave them to it I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 2, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted December 2, 2015 A couple of professors at Kings College commented earlier about how stupid the governments position on this whole thing is. I don't have them to hand but worth looking up, they were both professors of war and conflict and effectively said this is a debate over a conflict where we won't make much difference, where we don't have defined achievable goals (I.e. creating the same problem with success metrics the Vietnam war had) and so on. They were on the BBC live blog, worth consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 3 minutes ago, Chindie said: A couple of professors at Kings College commented earlier about how stupid the governments position on this whole thing is. I don't have them to hand but worth looking up, they were both professors of war and conflict and effectively said this is a debate over a conflict where we won't make much difference, where we don't have defined achievable goals (I.e. creating the same problem with success metrics the Vietnam war had) and so on. They were on the BBC live blog, worth consideration. Hopefully they've been taken in for questioning by now. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 2 minutes ago, Chindie said: Cameron loves being able to show what an important statesman he is, and the ultimate stage for a statesman is apparently conflict. You can tell he hates the humdrum day to day stuff, he treats it largely with disdain, but if it's some grand event he can claim to have had a hand in and stand next to the US President he's all over it. He also, in this case, is particularly pushing because the last time he lost the debate, which is one of the more embarrassing moments for a PM in history. He can't have it happen again. he got done by an opposition leader playing politics for personal gain ... it could also explain why he is looking for revenge on Labour this time around , Ed may be gone but it appears to be a great opportunity to cause disarray to the labour party. we've had attacks on mainland Europe I suspect if we send the 3 aircraft that we are talking about to bomb a few areas we will show some solidarity with them as Europeans or even as NATO countries , we could find that support useful at some stage not necessarily the right grounds for going in though ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 you don't become a fixture on the million dollar 'vip speaker' circuit by tweeking the changes to family tax credits you don't get to be a peace envoy by suggesting caution and long games he's on a count down to retirement, he needs to get in and start bombing, then get out before it turns, inevitably, to unforseen shit which he can't be responsible for as he's now moved on to million dollar talks about how to achieve peace and would obviously have done things differently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts