Kendo11 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 It's not that much to do with Turkey being in the EU to be honest from my reading of the situation. It's much more a case of "here's £3billion, the refugees are now your problem". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Oh dear Mr Corbyn. Referring to the genocide that occurred during the Kosovan conflict as "not really happening". Press will have a field day. http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2004-05/392 Very messy "believes the pollution impact of the bombing of Kosovo is still emerging, including the impact of the use of depleted uranium munitions; and calls on the Government to provide full assistance in the clean up of Kosovo." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted November 30, 2015 Author Share Posted November 30, 2015 Even more than admitting Turkey based on the general direction the county is heading culturaly/politicaly, it would swap one small border between the EU nations of Greece and Bulgaria, for an enormous border with Iraq, Iran and Syria. A border we know the Turks have little control over. And like I said, there's the minute detail of Turkey not even being in Europe. One thing is certain though, the Greeks and Cypriots will be expecting enormous concessions to allow Turkey to join. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/war-with-isis-president-obama-demands-that-turkey-close-stretch-of-frontier-with-syria-a6753836.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Europe has had it. They had their chances and they blew them. Once the siege is complete the occupation and changes will get going in earnest. Hundreds of years of culture and development down the drain. Would this be occurring had the Germans won the war and hadn't become emancipated apologetic Liberals, in the main? In a relatively few years they have gone from dominant and audacious aggressors, mooting a master race, to simpering Liberals holding their doors wide open to the detritus marching unhindered across Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Not particularly a fan of his - however here he is spot on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 1, 2015 Author Share Posted December 1, 2015 The thing is, what's Corbyns definition of peace in this situation? I don't trust Corbyns position, because he believes in peace for the sake of peace. People who are unwilling to fight for a just and necessary cause are just cowards. And now it emerges that Corbyn supports gender segregation, one of the values of Isis. http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/623108/Oldham-West-and-Royton-by-election-Labour-gender-segregation-Jim-McMahon-rally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo11 Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Not particularly a fan of his - however here he is spot on Agree. He's made some gaffes recently but he is correct here. Quite how Cameron and a lieutenant general can stand in front of their peers and confidently say there are 70,000 rebels willing to act as a ground force for us is absolutely insane in the extreme. Plus the "tens of millions of pounds" (Osborne) that a bombing campaign will cost could be better put to use making our own country safer first. None of them seem to have a handle on the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 1, 2015 Author Share Posted December 1, 2015 Even if it is true, what sort of training have these forces had? Will they abide by the Geneva Convention? And yet more silence by the regional 'powers' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo11 Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 It isn't true though that's the point. There are about 35,000 vetted by the CIA, and less than 1000 being directly trained and supplied by the US. The FSA & PKK are now turning on each other, and a lot of the rest have ties to Al Nusra (Al Qaeda), who themselves have released a load of glossy well produced execution videos that IS would be proud of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 There are about 35,000 vetted by the CIA, . Saddam was vetted by the CIA too. CIA =peacekeeper in the middle east especially "not so rich" Arab countries = really? in any case - we should be focussing on the situation within our borders FIRST and then within our neighbouring borders (EU). thats the main threat. bloody liars relishing a blood bath for the sake of power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supra2jze Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 I saw someone post this as a comment on Corbyn's page, just had to share it. - Syria. A piece of land roughly the same size as the state of Washington and tonight Parliament debate whether to bomb it or not and I've no doubt they will vote in favour. There's lots of money to be made in war. David Cameron called everyone who opposes the bombing "terrorist sympathisers" and refuses to apologise and if you share this view whilst at the same time complaining about asylum seekers then you my friend are fucking idiot and I'll tell you why; 1). Bombing hasn't worked - Russia, France and their various allies are already bombing Syria and the US has been for over a year so why still ISIS?? 2) The refugees you despise and don't want "comin' over 'ere, bombin' us" are fleeing the bombs already being dropped. Drop more and create more refugees, it's basic maths really. 3) Bombs aren't intelligent, they don't know who to target, if you think killing innocent kids is OK then you're a cunt. 4) No negotiation and no plan - Obviously you can't sit and have a brew with ISIS, they don't want anything from us apart from our destruction. However we can talk to the other gay hating, women demeaning, hand removing, back lashing, beheading group, Saudi Arabia, our allies and ask them to stop part funding ISIS. We could also ask them to stop giving the weapons we're selling them to ISIS and to also take some refugees in? Or maybe we could politely ask Turkey to stop buying their oil on the cheap? 5) You're Government aren't trying to protect you. Bombing without a plan creates terrorism, it's a vicious circle, you see, the thing about being bombed is that people don't like it. They hate it in fact and become quite resentful. We bombed Iraq without a plan, then we gave some rebels some money, training and weapons and left them to it. But the thing is, they resented us and some of them formed ISIS. If we get involved now then we're asking for more terrorist acts against us. 6) We're supposedly skint. The NHS is in tatters, people are using food banks, the severely disabled are killing themselves and front line services and police are being cut so how do we afford it? If being against bombing Syria makes me a terrorist sympathiser then call me Jihadi Ste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 I'm not sure why there's such an outcry about Cameron calling Corbyn a "terrorist sympatisher". He is a terrorist sympathiser. Not specifically Isis, but he is happy to share a platform with the likes of Hamas and Hezbolah, and him and his pals thought IRA terrorism was justified. Of course, Cameron was being childlike and inflammatory, but he was at least being accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 For better or worse, looks like the strikes are going ahead http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34989302 I suppose some small consolation for those against them (myself included) is that our pilots are the best trained, and we make use of the excellent Brimstone system,which is one of the most accurate strike weapons in the world, and causes minimum collateral (it is based on the Hellfire system off the Apache, designed to kill armoured targets) What is surprising is the size of the parliamentary majority: 397 to 223. But public opinion is clearly in favour of strikes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheefa Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Glad about this. All in all the very right thing to do. We're at war already with ISIS with countless attacks having been thwarted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo11 Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Poor, poor, poor decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 I don't see how Corbyn will be able to get past this. He only allowed a free vote to avoid a rebellion, and now far more of the party have voted for strikes than could have been imagined a few hours ago. A majority of 30-60 had been estimated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Massey Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Poor, poor, poor decision. Well the majority of the public and the MP's think different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo11 Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Well the majority of the public and the MP's think different. 54% of the public...huge majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 It's still a majority. Besides which, did the other 46% all say they were against, or were there some unsures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo11 Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 It's still a majority. Besides which, did the other 46% all say they were against, or were there some unsures? Barely. Against. Simple poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Not surprising - entirely predictable like said earlier war is a super successful business model and there is as additional incentive in destabilising and targeting the "not so rich" Arab countries to further the greater Israel expansion project. To me it seems like Isis was a deliberate creation exaggerated to mobilise this next phase of an established and agreed plan. Sad day for our civil and humane society - feel sorry for the innocent losses already sustained and the many more innocent sustained moving forward both home and away - local and foreign only to guarantee a more dangerous world for our and future generations to inherit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Massey Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 54% of the public...huge majority. On a poll that only counts people who actually took it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 further the greater Israel expansion project. To me it seems like Isis was a deliberate creation exaggerated to mobilise this next phase of an established and agreed plan. I'm sorry Imi, but that really is tinfoil hat stuff. The problem as I see it is that there are a large number of people around the world who believe Islam, and laws reflecting conservative Islamic values is a suitable form of political governance. This is why Isis can recruit from both Islamic nations and Islamic minority groups from around the world. You were talking before about cutting off Isis's supplies - people are one of them. This isn't unique to Syria, this form of extremist Islamic nationalism is spreading across the Middle East, Africa and now even Europe. The fact that if is the poorest who are being exploited is just indicative of all exploitative ideologies. While the recruits of Isis are uniquely Muslim, it could just as easily have been Christianity or Judaism in a different time. Religion has no place in politics, or outside of the home or church / mosque / synagogue. When it does, it always leads to extremism and division. Trying to blame all of this on Israel is feeding into the extremists rhetoric in a way that is every bit as bad as bombing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 How many of these Brimstone things have we actually got? How much do they cost? From a purely financial and logistical point of view lobbing very expensive missiles at a few blokes in a beaten up pick up truck seems a bit pointless. Are there some more worthy targets the various forces out there can engage? And what's President Assad had to say, does he want us bombing in his sovereign state? Were wanting to annihilate him last year.... What's happening with the hordes of unknown people roaming across Europe, and the morass in Calais that's at constant boiling point? When do the Yanks get shot of Obama? Maybe their next president will actually make some decisions and actually do something useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abz Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Good to see we always have billions in the bank for war. Stinks of Iraq all over again. Perfect way to kill further innocents so ISIL can recruit more people, well played into their hands, I feel so much safer now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.