Reply With QuoteI'm surprised that Blair isn't standing up for his old mate
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/ar ticle1072174.ece
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
A hugely important decision will be made in the House of Commons this week on whether to permit UK airstrikes in Syria.
I'm no appeaser, nor am I a pacifist and I look forward to the day when IS and their vile, warped ideology are totally destroyed but the whole premise for airstrikes in Syria is hopelessly flawed. More than that it is also incredibly dangerous and will almost certainly badly backfire and speed up the conveyor belt of Jihadis and significantly increase the threat to British citizens at home and abroad. The exact opposite of what airstrikes are supposed to achieve.
Significantly in the last day or so the former UK ambassador to Syria has spoken out against Cameron's plans re:airstrikes. To quote him: "to go into this situation with our eyes wide shut is ridiculous and criminally negligent."
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh1BbvbMOp4&feature=youtu. be
There is also a very good piece here from a journalist who lived amongst IS and interviewed a number of their followers last year: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/27/bomb-is is-west-learned-nothign-from-war-terror-defeat-muslim-world- equal-partner?CMP=share_btn_tw
It looks as if Cameron may have to rely on Labour support to get this vote through as there are a number of Tory rebels. I politely suggest you read up on this situation and make your views known to your local MP.
Let's learn from the mistakes of Iraq and Libya and make ourselves heard to avoid hitting the hornets nest with a big stick again.
I'm surprised that Blair isn't standing up for his old mate
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/ar ticle1072174.ece
I'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.
What are the alternative courses of action ?
It's a very complex situation , made worse by the lack of action over the past few years.
They have been bombed by the yanks, France and Russia and it hasn't stopped them.
Corbyns alternatives seem to lack any substance.
Is it really feasible to starve them of money/ arms/ block the oil ?
Surely this has already been tried ?
Glad I don't have to make the decision.
Tried by who?Originally Posted by Lawnmower wrote on Sun, 29 November 2015 21:19
We are bombing in Iraq, why not Syria ? ? ?
Let's crush the bastards but let's use our heads..for once.
What did Kerry ask that Assad could not deliver?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/1 0283045/John-Kerry-and-Bashar-al-Assad-dined-in-Damascus.htm l
The vast majority of those wanting us to bomb want to so for reasons not fully examined ("What would Churchill say!" "We can't run away from a fight!" "Murderous death cult!") and we know for sure that doesn't work. There are still too many unanswered questions to risk everything we risk by getting involved at this stage. There are, however, a few days to provide more reasoned answers.
After the Paris attacks two experts (one MP and one academic) couldn't agree whether Paris was a sign that ISIS were losing momentum and lashing out to try and regain some of that lost or whether ISIS were growing stronger and expanding into Europe.I'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.
Action only seemed to be taken or at least stepped up well after ISIS took control of large parts of the Middle East and North Africa.I'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.
More to do with plans coming to fruition which had been put together months ago.I'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.What are the alternative courses of action ?
As far as military intervention from neighbouring states, then why has this not already happened, and who could step in without it escalating ? No easy answer as far as I can see.I'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.
IS absolutely have to be destroyed and we do have an important part to play but the role should be that of a supporting actor. The defeat of IS ultimately has to come from other Muslim nations, albeit with plenty of non military international community support. France, Britain and America all have way too much imperial military baggage.I'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.What are the alternative courses of action ?
I fail to see that us not helping out with air sorties is likely to stop them attacking usI'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.What are the alternative courses of action ?
Alfie , if military action is not the answer then what is ? , please don't say follow the political process like corbyn said , as that doesn't real mean anything. You can't negotiate with IS, they have no demands and want to kill as many westerners as they can (Christian, Jews and muslims)
If we do nothing they will continue? , I'd love to say just build a fence around them , but that is not possible, and the people who carried out the attacks were already living in the country they were attacking.
Knocking off their food and oil supply lines also will have grave consequences for people living in raqqa etc. Alledegly according to George Galloway turkey is buying oil sourced from IS that is being bought by the Turkish PM family members (and we want turkey in the EU....)
Other than internment and bringing back border controls and having a shoot on site policy , I see no other way of protecting the uk public , and no other way to stop IS in the current regions than to either use boots on the ground.
There is NO easy answer, so what is yours ? , I don't have one either by the way
A good starting point would be all parties laying their cards on the table and admitting what they are really up to. It seems like everybody is saying one thing and doing another.
that is just the western way, greed, cheap oil in the case of the turks, sell it on, get richer, once again, greedAlfie , if military action is not the answer then what is ? , please don't say follow the political process like corbyn said , as that doesn't real mean anything. You can't negotiate with IS, they have no demands and want to kill as many westerners as they can (Christian, Jews and muslims)
If we intend targeting these Jihadi dicks shouldnt we be bombing parts of Luton, London and Cardiff?
Even if Syria was wiped 'clean' of people by airstrikes by every country in the world, the ideology of Daesh would continue or spring up elsewhere and terrorist attacks would still continue to happen across the world.
So bearing that in mind, it would be sheer folly to get involved in airstrikes.
A much cleverer solution needs to be found.
Kill them where we find them.
I also don't advocate negotiating with IS either!!they've got to be wiped out. But political negotiations and settlements in Iraq and Syria will have to happen at some point in the future obviously.
You really think they want to sit down and negotiate with the West ?? ? or anyone for that matter ? ? ?I also don't advocate negotiating with IS either!!
SpedgerI'm not convinced it's a good thing , it could very well make things worse, but something must be done.
The vote on air strikes is political expediency merely to show solidarity with our Allies.It is not going to solve the problem.
Purely my opinion but the only way to solve this would be to send in troops on the ground and that is simply not going to happen any time soon as there is no will in the country for that scenario currently.
Posting Permissions