chrisp65

looks like Michael Green has had to resign...

Blandy, Yeah I don't want to get too bogged down in the exact costs, but at £22k each for paveway and £105 each for brimstone, that 4x22 is 88 plus 2 x 105 is 210 comes to £298,000. So I'm sticking to my 'just under £300k'. But I wouldn't want to bet my house on those numbers, it was basic figures grabbed from a few quick google sources such as wikipedia / sky / mod.

hmmm, wife and youngest just walked in the room whilst I was googling images 'gay guys drinking tea'....

So do you believe a little bit of extra bombing from another 4 planes will fix this? I know, of course you don't. Just like nobody believes leaving them alone will fix it. So perhaps the plan needs to be developed a little bit? Payload for a Tornado is usually 4 pathway missiles and 2 brimstone missiles, combined cost just under £300,000. Tornados fly in pairs, so that's £600,000 in missiles per mission. Oh yeah, fuel and running costs for a Tornado are £35,000 per hour. The average mission takes 6 hours, that's £210,000. But there are two of them remember, so that's £420,000. So with the missiles, that's just nudged over a million pound per mission. So far, the coalition have launched over 5,500 missions across Iraq and Syria. How many missions are their likely to be? Do we know? Is there an estimate? What's the size of land area we are attacking, what number of ISIS fighters are there? How many civilians do they control? Nah, detail, detail, detail. Detail is for pussies. Bomb 'em. What plan have we got to rehabilitate our wounded? Our ground forces? Our medics and cooks and refuelers? I guess once they come home we can skimp on support and let them live in shit and piss under bridges? Better we do that than spend, er, well spend say £800,000 on rehab and housing. After all, every time we waste £800,000 on our returning military, that's another single Storm Shadow missile we can't buy. How long do we plan on bombing? It better not be too long, after all, these awe inspiring politicians are reducing the number of Tornados by a third by 2020. I wouldn't trust these people to plan and budget a birthday party. Yet lots of people are happy to let them just go and play war without even explaining what they would consider winning to mean. Even if they just said this is containment and retribution until we have a plan! That would at least be honest.

Diane Abbot. That's not a card you'd want to be dealt if you were playing MP Top Trumps.

Well, yes and no, Awol. It wasn't deliberate missing of the point, and putting it that way is a bit different. I missed the subtlety of the message. But I'd still challenge the premise that not wanting bomb a terrorist enemy into more atrocity and a cycle of revenge is cowardice. It's not automatically cowardice. It looks a bit like a sane response. If the solution goes on to say, we'll do anything not to upset them, that's cowardice. If the solution is less bombs, spend the money on something smarter that actually has a chance of working. That's not cowardice. Fear of a cycle of revenge attacks is not necessarily a bad thing. Fear is not automatically a bad thing. What you do with it is what counts.

Questioning the efficacy of just adding some bombs into the mix in Syria is hardly moral cowardice. Moral cowardice is wanting to drop some bombs, on a bit of a budget, because that's what all the big boys are doing. Again, I'm not utterly opposed to bombing in any circumstances. I, like many moral cowards, would like to know there is a bit more of a plan this time. What with not having had a plan on a number of previous occasions I was just thinking perhaps we might learn something, try something different to what has previously failed, failed and failed again. Let's just drop some more bombs and hope it goes away this time, is not strategy. Let's drop some bombs and hop a.n.other pops up and persuades the middle east to be compliant, is not strategy. Let's drop some bombs and hope that persuades suggestible kids to have a shave and embrace western ideology, is not strategy.

Yeah, you can order online, but then you don't get to walk over someone else's kids or punch and old lady in the tits to get that last kettle. I'm not even buying anything! I'm just going around all the shops smashing up displays and forcing doors open the wrong way. I've gone out barefoot. When I see a TV camera I'm going to sit on the floor and scream 'they took my shoes, they took my shoes'. Watch out for me on Channel 4 with Krishnan Guru-Murthy.

Does anyone know what the plan is? I don't mean what date and time are we bombing point 'x' on the map. I mean, is the plan as simple as portrayed, let's bomb them all dead so they go away?

I'm going to try and take my question over to the slightly more relevant thread...

Out of curiosity what's the objective of the air strikes? I'm undecided, so I'd like to know what the plan is before making up my mind. So far I've only heard that we need to join in and we need to beat ISIS. But I know the strategy must be far more complex and developed than that, given our recent record.

it's not even a little debate, there's loads of it people mass debating in this thread

happy to report that with the clock running down, I haven't bought a single duffer this year, been pleased with everything of new new stuff, New Order, Plastic is probably getting the most plays

Yep, not trying to down play it, I've worked a 24 hour shift, but if I get something wrong then windows are the wrong size on a building. It wouldn't kill someone. I also didn't then go on to work another 76 hours that same week. I would genuinely have thought that someone regularly doing that, working 24 hour shifts and 100 hour weeks has a very limited period of efficacy and good decision making. But I'm not seeing stories in the news of dozens of NHS staff driving their cars into rivers or falling asleep on their motorbike journey home etc.. But that's a diversion in to detail. Given a choice of siding with junior doctors in the NHS or Jeremy Hunt I'm disinclined to trust Hunt.

the hours is an interesting one Does it include 'on call' by any chance? Whereby you can grab sleep or rest periods but might be unlucky and get a busy night? Still destructive of morale and health, still shouldn't happen. But yes, I find it hard to believe that somebody regularly works a 90 hour week, as I heard on the radio recently, with 100 hours reported in several newspapers. I mean, just to state the obvious a 100 hour week is 14 hours per day every day of the week. I've recently clocked up a couple of 60 hour weeks and it physically and mentally smashed me. As for reike and homeopathy and all the other guff, let's see the figures. If it works, maybe keep it. I don't mean 'works' obviously, I just mean 'works'.

shiite?

please let the numbers be 3 10 please please

Six months I put up with that sex robot as it got progressively less and less enjoyable. Six months. Then I realised there was a drain down plug.

page 12 of the manual: troubleshooting problem 1.0 will not release my cock from type 3000 sani vaj receptacle solution - unit will need to be returned to manufacturer I may have given this subject too much thought.

Our first VCR used to snap shut and take your finger tips off. I will not be an earlier adopter of sex robots.

right wing mouthpiece news organ Planned changes to tax credits scrapped. Not tweeked or phased in or explained or cushioned or any of that rubbish. Just not doing it now.

I cook my own food and sleep one eye at a time.