The Politics Thread

[thebish]

Anyway, my Facebooke cho chamber is full of people telling moving stories about their nans who died in WWII and the human cost of chucking bombs on things. Well, yes, but that's not an argument. There's a human cost to not chucking bombs on things too. Weighing up the difference between those two costs (which even still is massively to simplifiy) is the trick, for which you need something apporaching nuance!

I'm astounded by the number of people who absolutely know what they think on this (and yet agan this place does itself proud by having v little of it). Are there folk out there with links to the MoD that only I don't know about?

thank goodness you're here then!

(also - such touching faith that the MoD know what they think on this!)

[thebish]

^^ Not that this will stop "certain types" from claiming, should an attack later occur, that this was BECAUSE of any bombing. It will, of course, be nothing of the sort.

I suspect people might say that - and it would be simplistic to claim such, of course...

however - given that Hunt has been on every programme available telling us that we are doing this to stop a Paris-style attack in London - then maybe they couldn't be blamed for thinking he actually means that...

but then - we've had politicians bamboozling the public (and ovine MPs) with over-claims for the effectiveness of remote bombing campaigns before...


edit: Dave Cameron has been telling the commons only this afternoon that airstrikes will keep British people safe. Should there be an attack in the UK following the airstrikes - then again - you might imagine that folk might wonder if he has also been guilty of overclaiming...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Well personally speaking, you're all talking bollocks.
I wouldn't like to meet any of you in a dark room in Raqqa/ Leytonstone/Ramsbottom...
And take that how you want.

[Hoboh]

I think we are going to make a big mistake tonight in this vote, it begs the question have ISIS completely deserted Iraq now?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I think we are going to make a big mistake tonight in this vote, it begs the question have ISIS completely deserted Iraq now?

Why does it beg that question?
Where do you think Mosul was... before being in the Caliphate, I mean Islamic State, oops I mean Daeshistan.

[Hoboh]

I think we are going to make a big mistake tonight in this vote, it begs the question have ISIS completely deserted Iraq now?

Why does it beg that question?
Where do you think Mosul was... before being in the Caliphate, I mean Islamic State, oops I mean Daeshistan.

Because, quite simply everyone seems hell bent on bombing Syria, ISIS in Syria is the enemy, never mind the fcukwits control half of Iraq and we stand a far better chance there first of getting some resolution.

[Hoboh]

The government has won the first vote on Syria by a majority of 179. The cross-party amendment saying the case had not been made was defeated by 390 votes to 211.

Around 60 Labour MPs voted against the John Baron amendment, according to Sky.
Most of those MPs are likely to be voting with the government for airstrikes in the vote taking place now.

Government wins vote on airstrikes by majority of 174
Government wins vote on airstrikes by majority of 174. Some 397 MPs were in favour, and 223 against.

Sky is reporting that 67 Labour MPs voted for airstrikes, and 152 voted against.

[KeyserSoze]

I think we are going to make a big mistake tonight in this vote, it begs the question have ISIS completely deserted Iraq now?

Why does it beg that question?
Where do you think Mosul was... before being in the Caliphate, I mean Islamic State, oops I mean Daeshistan.

Because, quite simply everyone seems hell bent on bombing Syria, ISIS in Syria is the enemy, never mind the fcukwits control half of Iraq and we stand a far better chance there first of getting some resolution.

We're already bombing Iraq aren't we? The motion is to extend the bombing campaign to Syria - well, actually the motion was to stop the extension of the bombing, but hey ho.

The much discussed Hilary Benn speech audio here

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/1 ... e-tonight/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Hoboh]

I think we are going to make a big mistake tonight in this vote, it begs the question have ISIS completely deserted Iraq now?

Why does it beg that question?
Where do you think Mosul was... before being in the Caliphate, I mean Islamic State, oops I mean Daeshistan.

Because, quite simply everyone seems hell bent on bombing Syria, ISIS in Syria is the enemy, never mind the fcukwits control half of Iraq and we stand a far better chance there first of getting some resolution.

We're already bombing Iraq aren't we? The motion is to extend the bombing campaign to Syria - well, actually the motion was to stop the extension of the bombing, but hey ho.

The much discussed Hilary Benn speech audio here

http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/1 ... e-tonight/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The focus will be shifted, why could the extra aircraft now set to leave for Cyprus used there?

[Hoboh]

At least one good thing has come from last night and scumbag Livingston this morning, the Trotsky's have no chance of winning an election

[Athers]

Wait, we've got drones and shit for this, right?

Anyway, my Facebooke cho chamber is full of people telling moving stories about their nans who died in WWII and the human cost of chucking bombs on things. Well, yes, but that's not an argument. There's a human cost to not chucking bombs on things too. Weighing up the difference between those two costs (which even still is massively to simplifiy) is the trick, for which you need something apporaching nuance!

I'm astounded by the number of people who absolutely know what they think on this (and yet agan this place does itself proud by having v little of it). Are there folk out there with links to the MoD that only I don't know about?

Going off social media it would appear that we've decided to attack the citizens of Raqqa like we did Dresden in 1945. So far we've attacked an oil field.

For balance, Cameron's remarks pre-debate were reckless & insulting too, but I honestly think more folk think that of Corbyn than worship him. I'm obviously a sensible centrist on the subject

I think it's worth reading the motion through if anyone hasn't

Motion for debate

MPs debated the following motion:

“That this House notes that ISIL poses a direct threat to the United Kingdom; welcomes United Nations Security Council Resolution 2249 which determines that ISIL constitutes an 'unprecedented threat to international peace and security' and calls on states to take 'all necessary measures' to prevent terrorist acts by ISIL and to 'eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria'; further notes the clear legal basis to defend the UK and our allies in accordance with the UN Charter; notes that military action against ISIL is only one component of a broader strategy to bring peace and stability to Syria; welcomes the renewed impetus behind the Vienna talks on a ceasefire and political settlement; welcomes the Government's continuing commitment to providing humanitarian support to Syrian refugees; underlines the importance of planning for post-conflict stabilisation and reconstruction in Syria; welcomes the Government’s continued determination to cut ISIL’s sources of finance, fighters and weapons; notes the requests from France, the US and regional allies for UK military assistance; acknowledges the importance of seeking to avoid civilian casualties, using the UK’s particular capabilities; notes the Government will not deploy UK troops in ground combat operations; welcomes the Government's commitment to provide quarterly progress reports to the House; and accordingly supports Her Majesty's Government in taking military action, specifically airstrikes, exclusively against ISIL in Syria; and offers its wholehearted support to Her Majesty's Armed Forces .”

[Athers]

Iraq: The focus will be shifted, why could the extra aircraft now set to leave for Cyprus used there?

Supposedly we have weapons with a superior/different type of targeting which France & the US don't have. Also when our planes happen to be in the air in Iraq they can be needed in minutes for live battles in Syria.

[thebish]

Going off social media it would appear that we've decided to attack the citizens of Raqqa like we did Dresden in 1945. So far we've attacked an oil field.

which would make some kind of sense if our strategy was to cut off ISISs potential funding streams... If we are doing that, though - then we will have to be commited to the future and take some responsibility for the financing of the rebuilding of Syria - which would involve some idea about a long-term strategy for Syria's governance. we can't destroy Syria's oil fields and infrastructure - and then claim later on that it's nowt to do with us and whatever governance emerges just has to make do with some rubble and a few burning oil wells... have we the commitment/cash to see that through? I'd be a lot more comfortable if the govt had set out a coherent strategy that this bombing is a piece of...

[Athers]

Yep we'll need something the magnitude of a Marshall Plan. If they can achieve political stability in that country then rebuilding roads and factories should be the easy part in comparison, but we'll see. I'd hope it'll be easier with the world on board (e.g. Chinese construction firms) rather than relying on two or three big Western players.

[Hoboh]

Iraq: The focus will be shifted, why could the extra aircraft now set to leave for Cyprus used there?

Supposedly we have weapons with a superior/different type of targeting which France & the US don't have. Also when our planes happen to be in the air in Iraq they can be needed in minutes for live battles in Syria.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/b ... 06595.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Unless we had about 10 more reapers to throw in, it's hardly worth it!

[thebish]

Iraq: The focus will be shifted, why could the extra aircraft now set to leave for Cyprus used there?

Supposedly we have weapons with a superior/different type of targeting which France & the US don't have. Also when our planes happen to be in the air in Iraq they can be needed in minutes for live battles in Syria.

Our bombs are different to Putin's bombs, apparently... just two months ago, David Cameron said: Moscow’s bombing campaign will “lead to further radicalisation and increased terrorism”..... Russian bombing causes terrorism - whereas OUR bombs will lead to freedom and safety for all.... I guess that's our "smart" bombs??

[Hoboh]

Iraq: The focus will be shifted, why could the extra aircraft now set to leave for Cyprus used there?

Supposedly we have weapons with a superior/different type of targeting which France & the US don't have. Also when our planes happen to be in the air in Iraq they can be needed in minutes for live battles in Syria.

Our bombs are different to Putin's bombs, apparently... just two months ago, David Cameron said: Moscow’s bombing campaign will “lead to further radicalisation and increased terrorism”..... Russian bombing causes terrorism - whereas OUR bombs will lead to freedom and safety for all.... I guess that's our "smart" bombs??

In Iraq there is a real chance of military success without us having to put boots on the ground against ISIS, Syria is a totally different matter, there we should be working with the Russians for a short and long term solution.

[BWFC_Insane]

Iraq: The focus will be shifted, why could the extra aircraft now set to leave for Cyprus used there?

Supposedly we have weapons with a superior/different type of targeting which France & the US don't have. Also when our planes happen to be in the air in Iraq they can be needed in minutes for live battles in Syria.

Our bombs are different to Putin's bombs, apparently... just two months ago, David Cameron said: Moscow’s bombing campaign will “lead to further radicalisation and increased terrorism”..... Russian bombing causes terrorism - whereas OUR bombs will lead to freedom and safety for all.... I guess that's our "smart" bombs??

And last year he wanted to bomb Syria....only the other side.....

[thebish]

according to Cameron, those opposing the bombing of Syria - so, the likes of Bobo and Hoboh - our ryhming brothers in arms - are "terrorist sympathisers"... I raised an eyebrow at that thought..

(well - if I could raise just one eyebrow I would have done - but I can't - it's one of those little things I wish I could do but can't! - so I had to do it metaphorically.)

[Hoboh]

according to Cameron, those opposing the bombing of Syria - so, the likes of Bobo and Hoboh - our ryhming brothers in arms - are "terrorist sympathisers"... I raised an eyebrow at that thought..

(well - if I could raise just one eyebrow I would have done - but I can't - it's one of those little things I wish I could do but can't! - so I had to do it metaphorically.)

Just shows you, he hasn't a clue!
I think that remark he made was below the belt and made out of desperation and a fear he might possibly loose the vote, take out Paris and he would.