Just to remind all, there are 40+ seats for Labour in Scotland, only a handful possible for the Tories.
We're The Conservative and Unionist Party of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Winning without Scotland in the UK will be as much as having a threesome on your own.
Dumbass Tories LOL!
The "Unionist" bit refers to the UNION with IRELAND, not SCOTLAND!
Today's Tory party came about in 1912 through merger of the Liberal Unionist and Conservative Parties over the question of Irish Home Rule. The LU's broke with the Liberals in 1886.
Reading Maxs bad news made me think... We all have our disagreements on here, & sometimes I feel genuinely angry! But what must it take to commit murder in the name of religion/politics? Really incredible that people actually do it
King Cole, read MacBeth at school (it was my suggestion, actually). Rather liked it.
So did I; it was a GCE set play. As you said, it’s enjoyable. Going back to a thread FPT, unusually for a scientist one of my best GCE marks was for English Literature.
Mr. Max, is Kenya being attacked by both Boko Haram and Al-Shabab [Somalian Al-Qaeda affiliates]?
It seems almost all the news now is about extremist religious lunatics doing terrible things.
Both iirc. Al-Shabab are near the border with Somalia and Boko Haram operate within the country.
I believe Boko Haram almost exclusively operate in Nigeria (though a few attacks in Cameroon have been attributed to them).
Must have been Al-Shabab in that case, we don't have much detail yet other than it was a drive by attack by terrorists.
Very very sorry to hear that Max.
I must say the descent in Kenya recently has been shocking and tragic. Doubly so because the nasties are getting nearer (in fact are in or adjacent to) the tourist areas which will mean less revenue for the "normal" people who rely on foreign visitors for their livelihoods.
King Cole, read MacBeth at school (it was my suggestion, actually). Rather liked it.
So did I; it was a GCE set play. As you said, it’s enjoyable. Going back to a thread FPT, unusually for a scientist one of my best GCE marks was for English Literature.
I did Macbeth at school but in the version of the play with which we were issues the scene with the porter and the naughty words had been removed. Considered too licentious for the ardent and developing natures of Battersea schoolboys.
Agreed, if it is not admissible in court, I can't see how they can use it.
I think it could be quite useful in investigations e.g. when people are scared of someone they know did something. Not as evidence though as it only works consistently on people who are dumb or naturally honest.
No it does not.
If you had someone stabbed with a lot of witnesses but none of them wanted to say who did it and you asked them individually on a lie detector if x or y did it then you would consistently get the right answer depending on the number asked.
I agree it shouldn't be evidence.
You really shouldn't talk about topics you don't know about.
A quick google about False memory recall and manipulation thereof using language might educate you
But I'll make a prediction, you thought the Banksta did the stabbing.
If it can't be used as evidence there's no incentive to using manipulating language. You'd want the test as clean as possible.
Again, showing your lack of understanding.
The manipulation doesn't have to be deliberate, it can be accidental.
For example, people wrongly interchange the charge manslaughter with murder.
Or loose definitions of crimes.
Fair enough however if it can't be used as evidence then the *incentive* is for it to be as clean as possible.
How accurate is it when your job depends on it as is the case with a lot of American government jobs.
I'm talking about specific situations like where there's been a stabbing or a shooting on a housing estate with lots of witnesses but no-one will say.
Agreed, if it is not admissible in court, I can't see how they can use it.
I think it could be quite useful in investigations e.g. when people are scared of someone they know did something. Not as evidence though as it only works consistently on people who are dumb or naturally honest.
No it does not.
If you had someone stabbed with a lot of witnesses but none of them wanted to say who did it and you asked them individually on a lie detector if x or y did it then you would consistently get the right answer depending on the number asked.
I agree it shouldn't be evidence.
You really shouldn't talk about topics you don't know about.
A quick google about False memory recall and manipulation thereof using language might educate you
But I'll make a prediction, you thought the Banksta did the stabbing.
If it can't be used as evidence there's no incentive to using manipulating language. You'd want the test as clean as possible.
Again, showing your lack of understanding.
The manipulation doesn't have to be deliberate, it can be accidental.
For example, people wrongly interchange the charge manslaughter with murder.
Or loose definitions of crimes.
Fair enough however if it can't be used as evidence then the *incentive* is for it to be as clean as possible.
How accurate is it when your job depends on it as is the case with a lot of American government jobs.
I'm talking about specific situations like where there's been a stabbing or a shooting on a housing estate with lots of witnesses but no-one will say.
King Cole, read MacBeth at school (it was my suggestion, actually). Rather liked it.
So did I; it was a GCE set play. As you said, it’s enjoyable. Going back to a thread FPT, unusually for a scientist one of my best GCE marks was for English Literature.
I did Macbeth at school but in the version of the play with which we were issues the scene with the porter and the naughty words had been removed. Considered too licentious for the ardent and developing natures of Battersea schoolboys.
Left in in ours. Much to the delight of the elderly (must have been 50) schoolmaster! However, as Tam O’Shanter was another set text, with bits about young women in short petticoats, MacBeth presented few issues! We also had the History of Mr Polly with an (almost) paedophilic section. Mind, many of us either had, or would go on to have, summer jobs on Southend Sea Front, where even then there wasn’t a lot left to the imagination.
King Cole, read MacBeth at school (it was my suggestion, actually). Rather liked it.
So did I; it was a GCE set play. As you said, it’s enjoyable. Going back to a thread FPT, unusually for a scientist one of my best GCE marks was for English Literature.
I did Macbeth at school but in the version of the play with which we were issues the scene with the porter and the naughty words had been removed. Considered too licentious for the ardent and developing natures of Battersea schoolboys.
Left in in ours. Much to the delight of the elderly (must have 50) schoolmaster! However, as Tam O’Shanter was another set text, with bits about young women in short petticoats, MacBeth presented few issues! We also had the History of Mr Polly with an (almost) paedophilic section.
As I remember it form English A level, Chaucer uses the C word, but beginning with a Q.
It has not been a happy few days for supporters of Scottish independence. It remains too soon to say whether – unusually – last week’s debate between Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond has had any long-term impact on the race but the short-term impact has certainly been bad for the nationalists.
Not just because the tone – and detail! – of the press coverage has reinforced the idea that Darling won the debate (an idea bolstered by the fact it’s true) but because every day that passes in this fashion is another day in which the Yes campaign is not getting its message across. Every day that’s spent talking about the things your opponents want to talk is another day not spent talking about the things you want to talk about. It’s like bogeying a hole in golf at the same time as your opponent makes a birdie.
Campaigns rely on oxygen and, right now, the Yes campaign is being suffocated.
King Cole, read MacBeth at school (it was my suggestion, actually). Rather liked it.
So did I; it was a GCE set play. As you said, it’s enjoyable. Going back to a thread FPT, unusually for a scientist one of my best GCE marks was for English Literature.
I did Macbeth at school but in the version of the play with which we were issues the scene with the porter and the naughty words had been removed. Considered too licentious for the ardent and developing natures of Battersea schoolboys.
Left in in ours. Much to the delight of the elderly (must have 50) schoolmaster! However, as Tam O’Shanter was another set text, with bits about young women in short petticoats, MacBeth presented few issues! We also had the History of Mr Polly with an (almost) paedophilic section.
As I remember it form English A level, Chaucer uses the C word, but beginning with a Q.
Indeed. In the lower sixth we did Chaucer with Sons and Lovers (and King Lear). I well remember a double English period in which the master (like most at my school, a WW2 vet and as mad as a hatter) spent the whole time comparing Chaucer's crudity with the unstated elegance of suggestion with which Hardy dealt with naughty bits.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Reading the news the world looks like a clash of civilizations. That puts a decisive end for the second time (Hegel after the Battle of Jena and Fukuyama after the cold war) of the end of history.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
It has not been a happy few days for supporters of Scottish independence. It remains too soon to say whether – unusually – last week’s debate between Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond has had any long-term impact on the race but the short-term impact has certainly been bad for the nationalists.
Not just because the tone – and detail! – of the press coverage has reinforced the idea that Darling won the debate (an idea bolstered by the fact it’s true) but because every day that passes in this fashion is another day in which the Yes campaign is not getting its message across. Every day that’s spent talking about the things your opponents want to talk is another day not spent talking about the things you want to talk about. It’s like bogeying a hole in golf at the same time as your opponent makes a birdie.
Campaigns rely on oxygen and, right now, the Yes campaign is being suffocated.
Salmond is convinced that it is of paramount importance that Scotland keeps the pound, logic, therefore, demands that he casts his vote for No in the imminent referendum.
King Cole, read MacBeth at school (it was my suggestion, actually). Rather liked it.
So did I; it was a GCE set play. As you said, it’s enjoyable. Going back to a thread FPT, unusually for a scientist one of my best GCE marks was for English Literature.
I did Macbeth at school but in the version of the play with which we were issues the scene with the porter and the naughty words had been removed. Considered too licentious for the ardent and developing natures of Battersea schoolboys.
Left in in ours. Much to the delight of the elderly (must have 50) schoolmaster! However, as Tam O’Shanter was another set text, with bits about young women in short petticoats, MacBeth presented few issues! We also had the History of Mr Polly with an (almost) paedophilic section.
As I remember it form English A level, Chaucer uses the C word, but beginning with a Q.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Be careful what you say. You might be taken for a warmonger.
After all, we should only intervene if we are sure we will not make matters worse, and that where we can make a clear strategic difference we do so. Even if we know that the conflict will spread further, and more will die.
You a warmonger sir, and a friend of ISIL!
(At least, according to one esteemed poster fpt, who would rather sit back with whisky in hand whilst more people die and a caliphate is created).
Personally I think Salmond wants to take Scotland into the euro after a bitter row over the pound that raises people's hackles and makes them want to embrace the euro to spite England. That's why he doesn't have a particularly well developed currency plan. The trouble is, he can't say this, as he can't win an independence referendum that's also a euro referendum.
I thought the minimum alcohol price thing had been binned? According to Beeb news it is back with all-party support?
There is no end to the insanity of the government. I see in the paper today that they are now toying with making people pay inheritance tax before they die. Even Gordon Brown, as barking as he was, didn't come up with that one. Why anyone should vote Conservative is beyond me.
Be careful what you say. You might be taken for a warmonger.
After all, we should only intervene if we are sure we will not make matters worse, and that where we can make a clear strategic difference we do so. Even if we know that the conflict will spread further, and more will die.
You a warmonger sir, and a friend of ISIL!
(At least, according to one esteemed poster fpt, who would rather sit back with whisky in hand whilst more people die and a caliphate is created).
Still being utterly stupid and dishonest I see JJ. If you had actually bothered to read what I said on the last thread instead of trying in vain to defend your idiotic position over Syria you would have seen that I thought the Kurdish situation was one where we could indeed make a difference. You might even have noticed I was saying that since the US had people on the ground and clear targets then air strikes were worthwhile.
Of course given that you know absolutely nothing about the situation on the ground and try to pontificate from an arm chair and since this doesn't fit with your desire to present anyone who disagrees with your views as anti-interventionist under any circumstances, I am sure you will once again ignore these facts.
It is sad that you have now had to resort to outright lies and smear - particularly since it is all so easily checked on the previous thread. It just shows what a moronic attitude you have to such a serious matter.
Personally I think Salmond wants to take Scotland into the euro after a bitter row over the pound that raises people's hackles and makes them want to embrace the euro to spite England. That's why he doesn't have a particularly well developed currency plan. The trouble is, he can't say this, as he can't win an independence referendum that's also a euro referendum.
Yeah, maybe. Carney just seemed to be very precise with his currency union viability. Made me think that maybe Salmond had his (own) economists on-side and working hard.
Sorry, I canna keep up with this thread - and you're mentioning Scotland (and I felt my duty as a PB Scot, Yadda, yadda, yadda....)
Be careful what you say. You might be taken for a warmonger.
After all, we should only intervene if we are sure we will not make matters worse, and that where we can make a clear strategic difference we do so. Even if we know that the conflict will spread further, and more will die.
You a warmonger sir, and a friend of ISIL!
(At least, according to one esteemed poster fpt, who would rather sit back with whisky in hand whilst more people die and a caliphate is created).
We have no choice. We have to act. It really is Hitler all over again, they are never going to stop killing and expanding and conquering - until we kill them. It doesn't matter whose fault it is that they have come to power. They are here and they want to kill us.
(snip)
I'm not sure what we can do now without putting boots on the ground. The war has spread to Iraq, and is on the borders of other countries. Regional players are trying to gain power, whilst the west sits and says: "Oh, by saving these people we might make matters worse!"
Oh woe! Oh woe!
And at the core, it's all Miliband's fault. By his actions last year, he stopped us from cutting out the cancer before it spread, and made it harder for us to intervene in any meaningful way.
And he wants to be PM...
I'm really at a loss about what we can do. Our enemy has ground, money, influence, and increasing numbers. The west is weak about the Syria/Iraq and Ukrainian situations. The enemies of our values smell that weakness, and for once are willing to exploit it.
Be careful what you say. You might be taken for a warmonger.
After all, we should only intervene if we are sure we will not make matters worse, and that where we can make a clear strategic difference we do so. Even if we know that the conflict will spread further, and more will die.
You a warmonger sir, and a friend of ISIL!
(At least, according to one esteemed poster fpt, who would rather sit back with whisky in hand whilst more people die and a caliphate is created).
We have no choice. We have to act. It really is Hitler all over again, they are never going to stop killing and expanding and conquering - until we kill them. It doesn't matter whose fault it is that they have come to power. They are here and they want to kill us.
(snip)
And at the core, it's all Miliband's fault.
Good grief. I can't believe you even said that. How utterly pathetic you are.
The problem with getting involved militarily in this instance is not whether such action is justified, but to what extent the US and the upper echelons of our own Government really wants to destroy ISIS, and therefore what they will do, and yes, whether this will make things worse. Certainly they want to protect the nascent Kurdish state. They will use their presence to unseat Maliki and install a more malleable regime in Iraq. They may also bomb Syrian Government positions after being 'shot at' as they overfly Syria. But destroy ISIS? Sorry I don't believe it. Create a medieval Sunni client state along the Iraq Syria border sounds more like it to me. If the public gives tacit approval to military action, all this can happen 'in the heat of battle'. This being the case, sadly I would prefer the US to fund its own machinations.
Be careful what you say. You might be taken for a warmonger.
After all, we should only intervene if we are sure we will not make matters worse, and that where we can make a clear strategic difference we do so. Even if we know that the conflict will spread further, and more will die.
You a warmonger sir, and a friend of ISIL!
(At least, according to one esteemed poster fpt, who would rather sit back with whisky in hand whilst more people die and a caliphate is created).
We have no choice. We have to act. It really is Hitler all over again, they are never going to stop killing and expanding and conquering - until we kill them. It doesn't matter whose fault it is that they have come to power. They are here and they want to kill us.
(snip)
I'm not sure what we can do now without putting boots on the ground. The war has spread to Iraq, and is on the borders of other countries. Regional players are trying to gain power, whilst the west sits and says: "Oh, by saving these people we might make matters worse!"
Oh woe! Oh woe!
And at the core, it's all Miliband's fault. By his actions last year, he stopped us from cutting out the cancer before it spread, and made it harder for us to intervene in any meaningful way.
And he wants to be PM...
I'm really at a loss about what we can do. Our enemy has ground, money, influence, and increasing numbers. The west is weak about the Syria/Iraq and Ukrainian situations. The enemies of our values smell that weakness, and for once are willing to exploit it.
Even if you keep repeating your offensive lies it doesn't make them any more true.
You keep going on about bombing Assad and how that would have changed everything. So tell me, since you know so much about it (and yes that was sarcasm) just who or what exactly would you have bombed that would have stopped this happening? Hezbollah in Lebanon? Some Russian advisors manning anti-aircraft missile batteries around Damascus? The Assad troops who were actually fighting against the extremist groups who would become ISIS in eastern Syria?
Or maybe with your amazing powers of perception you would have bombed the extremists who would later become ISIS... except of course they were fighting against Assad not for him so you would have been helping him.
Your position was and is incoherent, ill informed and moronic.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Repeated swingback crossovers are good for the Tories as they show they are approaching level-pegging with Labour.
Oh those heady days of mid-May, three crossovers in as many days and PB Hodges declaring Swingback crossover with a Cameroon surge will now lead to a Tory majority....oh, how we laughed. They were there at the top of the hill, Tory majority in sight and whooshh, before you know it, the lot of them tumbled right back down. These random rare crossover polls are entertaining, if only to see the shares in PB Hodges tissues go through the roof as they get premature polling crossover ejaculation.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Repeated swingback crossovers are good for the Tories as they show they are approaching level-pegging with Labour.
Oh those heady days of mid-May, three crossovers in as many days and PB Hodges declaring Swingback crossover with a Cameroon surge will now lead to a Tory majority....oh, how we laughed. They were there at the top of the hill, Tory majority in sight and whooshh, before you know it, the lot of them tumbled right back down. These random rare crossover polls are entertaining, if only to see the shares in PB Hodges tissues go through the roof as they get premature polling crossover ejaculation.
I thought we've had a few more crossovers since May, which suggests a relative tightening of the gap between Lab and Con. As per the previous thread, the trend is your friend.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
I know it is unusual Hugh but for once I agree with you. I also think you were correct on all those previous occasions and that this is different because of the scale and intent.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Repeated swingback crossovers are good for the Tories as they show they are approaching level-pegging with Labour.
Oh those heady days of mid-May, three crossovers in as many days and PB Hodges declaring Swingback crossover with a Cameroon surge will now lead to a Tory majority....oh, how we laughed. They were there at the top of the hill, Tory majority in sight and whooshh, before you know it, the lot of them tumbled right back down. These random rare crossover polls are entertaining, if only to see the shares in PB Hodges tissues go through the roof as they get premature polling crossover ejaculation.
And I'd like to add that that comment was totally gross!
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Repeated swingback crossovers are good for the Tories as they show they are approaching level-pegging with Labour.
Oh those heady days of mid-May, three crossovers in as many days and PB Hodges declaring Swingback crossover with a Cameroon surge will now lead to a Tory majority....oh, how we laughed. They were there at the top of the hill, Tory majority in sight and whooshh, before you know it, the lot of them tumbled right back down. These random rare crossover polls are entertaining, if only to see the shares in PB Hodges tissues go through the roof as they get premature polling crossover ejaculation.
I thought we've had a few more crossovers since May, which suggests a relative tightening of the gap between Lab and Con. As per the previous thread, the trend is your friend.
Ed Miliband has overturned a narrow Tory advantage to take a commanding seven point lead after a bruising week for David Cameron in the wake of the resignation of Baroness Warsi over the Gaza crisis, according to a new Guardian / ICM poll.
In a boost for Labour, which is embarking on a pre-election summer campaign called The Choice, the party has seen its support increase by five points over the last month to 38%, a share it last recorded in March. The Tories see their support fall by three points to 31% – last recorded in June – giving Labour a seven-point lead. In last month's Guardian / ICM poll the Tories had a one-point lead over Labour – 34% to 33%.
The Liberal Democrats are unchanged on 12%, while Ukip sees a one-point increase in its support to 10%.
The poll, carried out between Friday and Sunday, followed a difficult week for the prime minister after Warsi resigned from the government after criticising the prime minister for his "morally indefensible" decision not to criticise Israel for disproportionate action in Gaza. On Wednesday Boris Johnson signalled his intention to return to parliament at next year's general election, placing him in a strong position to replace the prime minister.
Inevitable. Always happens. I've run the simulation 24 trillion times, it took more time than the Universe has been in existence. Murdoch's Ed smears will come and save us.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
Yes. Though it's arguably worse than Sierra Leone or Rwanda - those horrors were never going to come back to hurt us. We just had to act to prevent genocide.
But this is genocide AND it is a direct threat to us. If ISIS keeps expanding they will take over all of Sunni Iraq, Syria, maybe Jordan. They will become the ultimate terror state, with oil money, and they will buy chemical or nuclear weapons and then they will attack us, and use terrorists inside our borders, as well. It's not like they are exactly hiding their agenda.
We should have tackled them a year ago, two years ago. But we are where we are, and we can still crush them now, if we act fast. We have to crush them. They are a clear and present danger to US, let alone the poor bastards in the Middle East.
ISIS will keep going as long as they are funded, trained and armed, and radical mosques around the world continue to send them freshly brainwashed meat. Their bacteria-like spread and ability to self sustain on their ill-gotten gains is a carefully crafted media myth in order for Saudi Arabia to maintain deniability. For them to sell oil, someone has to buy the oil. For them to get fresh recruits, they have to be trained in Turkey, Jordan, KSA etc. All these things can be stopped tomorrow.
Ed Miliband has overturned a narrow Tory advantage to take a commanding seven point lead after a bruising week for David Cameron in the wake of the resignation of Baroness Warsi over the Gaza crisis, according to a new Guardian / ICM poll.
In a boost for Labour, which is embarking on a pre-election summer campaign called The Choice, the party has seen its support increase by five points over the last month to 38%, a share it last recorded in March. The Tories see their support fall by three points to 31% – last recorded in June – giving Labour a seven-point lead. In last month's Guardian / ICM poll the Tories had a one-point lead over Labour – 34% to 33%.
The Liberal Democrats are unchanged on 12%, while Ukip sees a one-point increase in its support to 10%.
The poll, carried out between Friday and Sunday, followed a difficult week for the prime minister after Warsi resigned from the government after criticising the prime minister for his "morally indefensible" decision not to criticise Israel for disproportionate action in Gaza. On Wednesday Boris Johnson signalled his intention to return to parliament at next year's general election, placing him in a strong position to replace the prime minister.
Iv'e never seen so many crossover swingbacks, it must be the Cameroon surge. I don't know who is more tired, Basil carrying the crossover goalposts or the PB Hodges marching up and repeatedly back down the polling crossover hill.
Repeated swingback crossovers are good for the Tories as they show they are approaching level-pegging with Labour.
Oh those heady days of mid-May, three crossovers in as many days and PB Hodges declaring Swingback crossover with a Cameroon surge will now lead to a Tory majority....oh, how we laughed. They were there at the top of the hill, Tory majority in sight and whooshh, before you know it, the lot of them tumbled right back down. These random rare crossover polls are entertaining, if only to see the shares in PB Hodges tissues go through the roof as they get premature polling crossover ejaculation.
I thought we've had a few more crossovers since May, which suggests a relative tightening of the gap between Lab and Con. As per the previous thread, the trend is your friend.
Utterly ridiculous, given that a lack of crossover tells us absolutely nothing about the relative position of the parties. Tories could have been 50 points behind and increased to 5 points behind and there still wouldn't be a crossover.
Is Iran likely to intervene? After all, ISIS is Sunni, and hates the Shias.
Syria's Assad is also a Shia (albeit of the Alawite flavour).
Oh and let's not forget Hezbollah down in south Lebanon.
It is also worth remembering that Iran has what it regards as its own Kurdish problem in the North West of the country. The Kurdish aim is for a n independent state that includes parts of Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran. The Iranians may be content to sit back and see Islamic State damage the Kurds more severely before getting involved further.
Inevitable. Always happens. I've run the simulation 24 trillion times, it took more time than the Universe has been in existence. Murdoch's Ed smears will come and save us.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
I know it is unusual Hugh but for once I agree with you. I also think you were correct on all those previous occasions and that this is different because of the scale and intent.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
The problem with arming your enemy's enemy is that it has an annoying tendency to come back and bite you on the backside.
I for one would be happy to see British squaddies on the ground serving these evil c**** their arses.
That's the key point, isn't it? Just what can we do? I see the RAF flew a transport plane to where the people are stuck on a mountain. The plane was full of water, tents, food and all sorts of goodies that the people need. When it got there they decided it would be hazardous to the people on the ground to drop the stuff, so they brought it all the way home again. If we cannot even organise a supply drop we have no chance of doing anything aggressive.
To do anything useful first requires political leadership and grip. Cameron is PM and can't do anything unless Clegg agrees even if he wanted to. Chances of anything real happening? Not high, I would suggest.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
I know it is unusual Hugh but for once I agree with you. I also think you were correct on all those previous occasions and that this is different because of the scale and intent.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
Arming the Kurds might not be enough. Look at these numbers:
We may have to take out entire towns where Isis are in control. Like we did with Hitler. It is getting that serious. Thousands of innocents will die. But if we don't do this, hundreds of thousands will die.
Unless someone has a better idea. Containment? How do we do that? They will attack Jordan next.
The oil and gas revenue one is interesting. Up until now (pre-ISIS) even in areas that the Baghdad government had little control over such as Kurdistan, all revenues from oil and gas production went to the central Iraqi government. The Kurds had long complained that they were getting little or no revenue from the oilfields in their region as all the neighbours of Iraq were paying the central government for what they were buying from them. It has even got to the point where some of the international oil companies have had to cutback or pull out as they have had no revenue for a year or more for their production.
And yet clearly ISIS are able to find buyers for their oil and also get it transported out of the country. So the real question that ought to be asked is who is buying the oil from them and what can be done to stop them.
That's the key point, isn't it? Just what can we do? I see the RAF flew a transport plane to where the people are stuck on a mountain. The plane was full of water, tents, food and all sorts of goodies that the people need. When it got there they decided it would be hazardous to the people on the ground to drop the stuff, so they brought it all the way home again. If we cannot even organise a supply drop we have no chance of doing anything aggressive.
To do anything useful first requires political leadership and grip. Cameron is PM and can't do anything unless Clegg agrees even if he wanted to. Chances of anything real happening? Not high, I would suggest.
It's too late., And you're wrong on one point: Cameron can't do anything unless Miliband agrees.
And we know how he treated the situation a year ago.
Just beat the rain to the front door this evening so that's a result of sorts.
ICM is, as always, fascinating - the combined Conservative/UKIP share is just 41% (compared with Populus at 45%) which must be one of the lowest recorded for some time.
On matters IS, like most other people, I've no answers. My only thought is in warfare the only two approaches that work are all or nothing. Again, as others have said, we may be compelled to ally with those we have previously never considered as such. "My enemy's enemy is my friend" is a maxim that is often used - it applies to the relationship with Stalin's USSR from 1941.
The other truth is that we have propped up some deeply unpleasant individuals simply because they functioned as a bulwark against a greater threat. Mobutu and Marcos would be two good examples of that in the Cold War period. The world may have changed but the principle probably hasn't.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
I know it is unusual Hugh but for once I agree with you. I also think you were correct on all those previous occasions and that this is different because of the scale and intent.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
The problem with arming your enemy's enemy is that it has an annoying tendency to come back and bite you on the backside.
I for one would be happy to see British squaddies on the ground serving these evil c**** their arses.
Though I hate to say it and in spite of having huge admiration for the British military I am just not sure we would be able to win. This is one of those situations that would need a much bigger input than we could provide and I am not sure the US or any of the other big players have the stomach.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
Yes. Though it's arguably worse than Sierra Leone or Rwanda - those horrors were never going to come back to hurt us. We just had to act to prevent genocide.
But this is genocide AND it is a direct threat to us. If ISIS keeps expanding they will take over all of Sunni Iraq, Syria, maybe Jordan. They will become the ultimate terror state, with oil money, and they will buy chemical or nuclear weapons and then they will attack us, and use terrorists inside our borders, as well. It's not like they are exactly hiding their agenda.
We should have tackled them a year ago, two years ago. But we are where we are, and we can still crush them now, if we act fast. We have to crush them. They are a clear and present danger to US, let alone the poor bastards in the Middle East.
ISIS will keep going as long as they are funded, trained and armed, and radical mosques around the world continue to send them freshly brainwashed meat. Their bacteria-like spread and ability to self sustain on their ill-gotten gains is a carefully crafted media myth in order for Saudi Arabia to maintain deniability. For them to sell oil, someone has to buy the oil. For them to get fresh recruits, they have to be trained in Turkey, Jordan, KSA etc. All these things can be stopped tomorrow.
The guy running Saudi intelligence was replaced in April
so I think it's possible that some of the parties who were very happy with Isis fighting Assad in Syria became less keen when it blew back over the border.
Ed Miliband has overturned a narrow Tory advantage to take a commanding seven point lead after a bruising week for David Cameron in the wake of the resignation of Baroness Warsi over the Gaza crisis, according to a new Guardian / ICM poll.
In a boost for Labour, which is embarking on a pre-election summer campaign called The Choice, the party has seen its support increase by five points over the last month to 38%, a share it last recorded in March. The Tories see their support fall by three points to 31% – last recorded in June – giving Labour a seven-point lead. In last month's Guardian / ICM poll the Tories had a one-point lead over Labour – 34% to 33%.
The Liberal Democrats are unchanged on 12%, while Ukip sees a one-point increase in its support to 10%.
The poll, carried out between Friday and Sunday, followed a difficult week for the prime minister after Warsi resigned from the government after criticising the prime minister for his "morally indefensible" decision not to criticise Israel for disproportionate action in Gaza. On Wednesday Boris Johnson signalled his intention to return to parliament at next year's general election, placing him in a strong position to replace the prime minister.
I hate how the guardian reports on its ICM polls. Though this isn't nearly as bad as the one where the headline flat out attributed a change in the polling positions to the reshuffle, with absolutely no evidence
We have no choice. We have to act. It really is Hitler all over again, they are never going to stop killing and expanding and conquering - until we kill them. It doesn't matter whose fault it is that they have come to power. They are here and they want to kill us.
(snip)
I'm not sure what we can do now without putting boots on the ground. The war has spread to Iraq, and is on the borders of other countries. Regional players are trying to gain power, whilst the west sits and says: "Oh, by saving these people we might make matters worse!"
Oh woe! Oh woe!
And at the core, it's all Miliband's fault. By his actions last year, he stopped us from cutting out the cancer before it spread, and made it harder for us to intervene in any meaningful way.
And he wants to be PM...
I'm really at a loss about what we can do. Our enemy has ground, money, influence, and increasing numbers. The west is weak about the Syria/Iraq and Ukrainian situations. The enemies of our values smell that weakness, and for once are willing to exploit it.
Even if you keep repeating your offensive lies it doesn't make them any more true.
You keep going on about bombing Assad and how that would have changed everything. So tell me, since you know so much about it (and yes that was sarcasm) just who or what exactly would you have bombed that would have stopped this happening? Hezbollah in Lebanon? Some Russian advisors manning anti-aircraft missile batteries around Damascus? The Assad troops who were actually fighting against the extremist groups who would become ISIS in eastern Syria?
Or maybe with your amazing powers of perception you would have bombed the extremists who would later become ISIS... except of course they were fighting against Assad not for him so you would have been helping him.
Your position was and is incoherent, ill informed and moronic.
You have yet to show they are lies. They are *opinions*.
As to what to strike: tactical strikes to punish Assad for the use of chemical weapons (a hideous crime you utterly ignore), and to 'persuade' him to stand down, ideally to Russia or a.n.other.
As I said at the beginning of this discussion: it's difficult to see how we could have made the situation worse than it is now, and easy to see how we could have improved it. That, it seems, is our biggest difference.
You have yet to show how you mantra of 'clear strategic difference' and 'be sure that we do not make matters worse' can ever be met. Heck, they might not even have been met over the Falklands crisis.
I also fail to see how they meet the current situation, either.
Andrew Neil explores what an independent Scotland would mean for Wales, England and Northern Ireland. He considers everything from the future of the armed forces and nuclear deterrent, to the UK's place at the international top table, as well as the fate of the union flag and the ramifications for the entire British political landscape.
That's the key point, isn't it? Just what can we do? I see the RAF flew a transport plane to where the people are stuck on a mountain. The plane was full of water, tents, food and all sorts of goodies that the people need. When it got there they decided it would be hazardous to the people on the ground to drop the stuff, so they brought it all the way home again. If we cannot even organise a supply drop we have no chance of doing anything aggressive.
To do anything useful first requires political leadership and grip. Cameron is PM and can't do anything unless Clegg agrees even if he wanted to. Chances of anything real happening? Not high, I would suggest.
It's too late., And you're wrong on one point: Cameron can't do anything unless Miliband agrees.
And we know how he treated the situation a year ago.
Yet again trying to make a political point out of the crisis whilst conveniently ignoring the fact that Cameron+ Clegg lead a majority of Parliament. Or had you forgotten that that is why they are in government? I have no great like for Miliband but to try an pretend he is at fault here is just ludicrous. Cameron needs to convince a majority of the MPs in Parliament. Right now it looks like he would be hard pushed to convince a majority in his own party.
That's the key point, isn't it? Just what can we do? I see the RAF flew a transport plane to where the people are stuck on a mountain. The plane was full of water, tents, food and all sorts of goodies that the people need. When it got there they decided it would be hazardous to the people on the ground to drop the stuff, so they brought it all the way home again. If we cannot even organise a supply drop we have no chance of doing anything aggressive.
To do anything useful first requires political leadership and grip. Cameron is PM and can't do anything unless Clegg agrees even if he wanted to. Chances of anything real happening? Not high, I would suggest.
It's too late., And you're wrong on one point: Cameron can't do anything unless Miliband agrees.
And we know how he treated the situation a year ago.
Surely it's not Ed who's to blame, but Sykes and Picot from 1916?
The Islamic State (ISIS) has vowed to bring an end to the borders drawn by the Sykes-Picot agreement. "This is not the first border we will break, we will break other borders," a jihadist from the ISIS warned in the video called End of Sykes-Picot.[46] Islamic State's leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a July 2014 speech at the Grand Mosque in Mosul vowed that "this blessed advance will not stop until we hit the last nail in the coffin of the Sykes-Picot conspiracy".[47][48]
That's the key point, isn't it? Just what can we do? I see the RAF flew a transport plane to where the people are stuck on a mountain. The plane was full of water, tents, food and all sorts of goodies that the people need. When it got there they decided it would be hazardous to the people on the ground to drop the stuff, so they brought it all the way home again. If we cannot even organise a supply drop we have no chance of doing anything aggressive.
To do anything useful first requires political leadership and grip. Cameron is PM and can't do anything unless Clegg agrees even if he wanted to. Chances of anything real happening? Not high, I would suggest.
It's too late., And you're wrong on one point: Cameron can't do anything unless Miliband agrees.
And we know how he treated the situation a year ago.
Yet again trying to make a political point out of the crisis whilst conveniently ignoring the fact that Cameron+ Clegg lead a majority of Parliament. Or had you forgotten that that is why they are in government? I have no great like for Miliband but to try an pretend he is at fault here is just ludicrous. Cameron needs to convince a majority of the MPs in Parliament. Right now it looks like he would be hard pushed to convince a majority in his own party.
That seems to be the PB Hodge fall back position on almost everything.....blame Miliband.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
I know it is unusual Hugh but for once I agree with you. I also think you were correct on all those previous occasions and that this is different because of the scale and intent.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
I've never said we *shouldn't* arm the Kurds; I've just pointed out that the action might be rather counter-productive in the short, medium and long term, something some on here seemed to be forgetting. It's especially odd to want to arm the Kurds (and by extension the PKK who have extra-national ambitions), but to have been against arming the Syrian FSA.
I've got no idea what's right to do. It's a mess.
Whereas you seemed to know the conflict would spread, and that more would die, yet were willing to do nothing.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
I know it is unusual Hugh but for once I agree with you. I also think you were correct on all those previous occasions and that this is different because of the scale and intent.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
The problem with arming your enemy's enemy is that it has an annoying tendency to come back and bite you on the backside.
I for one would be happy to see British squaddies on the ground serving these evil c**** their arses.
Though I hate to say it and in spite of having huge admiration for the British military I am just not sure we would be able to win. This is one of those situations that would need a much bigger input than we could provide and I am not sure the US or any of the other big players have the stomach.
I have no doubt that the British military could beat the snot out of the ISIS (or whatever they are calling themselves this week) fighters. However, that would require delivering sufficient troops into the field and sustaining them with proper support, artillery, air etc.) for long enough to get the job done. That I don't think we could do even if there was the political will to try, which there isn't and never will be.
Someone might ask Cameron about his soft power scheme. Surely the DfID should be stopping this sort of thing happening. Justine Greening has sent me a tweet this afternoon saying she is releasing £3m to the charities and NGOs that are already on the ground and so saving lives. Who those charities & NGOs are I have no idea. She also mentions the air drop, but doesn't mention health and safety stopped it actually happening.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
I know it is unusual Hugh but for once I agree with you. I also think you were correct on all those previous occasions and that this is different because of the scale and intent.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
Arming the Kurds might not be enough. Look at these numbers:
We may have to take out entire towns where Isis are in control. Like we did with Hitler. It is getting that serious. Thousands of innocents will die. But if we don't do this, hundreds of thousands will die.
Unless someone has a better idea. Containment? How do we do that? They will attack Jordan next.
The oil and gas revenue one is interesting. Up until now (pre-ISIS) even in areas that the Baghdad government had little control over such as Kurdistan, all revenues from oil and gas production went to the central Iraqi government. The Kurds had long complained that they were getting little or no revenue from the oilfields in their region as all the neighbours of Iraq were paying the central government for what they were buying from them. It has even got to the point where some of the international oil companies have had to cutback or pull out as they have had no revenue for a year or more for their production.
And yet clearly ISIS are able to find buyers for their oil and also get it transported out of the country. So the real question that ought to be asked is who is buying the oil from them and what can be done to stop them.
Would suggest French, Chinese, N Korea and probably Japan
ICM is a stinger for the government. Its the polling company with the best numbers usually for the government and they have Labour ahead by 7 points. I am almost tempted to call it an outlier, since the other pollsters haven't recorded any dramatic movement over Warsi.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
Yes. Though it's arguably worse than Sierra Leone or Rwanda - those horrors were never going to come back to hurt us. We just had to act to prevent genocide.
But this is genocide AND it is a direct threat to us. If ISIS keeps expanding they will take over all of Sunni Iraq, Syria, maybe Jordan. They will become the ultimate terror state, with oil money, and they will buy chemical or nuclear weapons and then they will attack us, and use terrorists inside our borders, as well. It's not like they are exactly hiding their agenda.
We should have tackled them a year ago, two years ago. But we are where we are, and we can still crush them now, if we act fast. We have to crush them. They are a clear and present danger to US, let alone the poor bastards in the Middle East.
ISIS will keep going as long as they are funded, trained and armed, and radical mosques around the world continue to send them freshly brainwashed meat. Their bacteria-like spread and ability to self sustain on their ill-gotten gains is a carefully crafted media myth in order for Saudi Arabia to maintain deniability. For them to sell oil, someone has to buy the oil. For them to get fresh recruits, they have to be trained in Turkey, Jordan, KSA etc. All these things can be stopped tomorrow.
The guy running Saudi intelligence was replaced in April
so I think it's possible that some of the parties who were very happy with Isis fighting Assad in Syria became less keen when it blew back over the border.
As to what to strike: tactical strikes to punish Assad for the use of chemical weapons (a hideous crime you utterly ignore), and to 'persuade' him to stand down, ideally to Russia or a.n.other.
As I said at the beginning of this discussion: it's difficult to see how we could have made the situation worse than it is now, and easy to see how we could have improved it. That, it seems, is our biggest difference.
I don't know much about military strategery in general or this situation in particular but it's not hard to see how it could have made the situation worse, is it? Damaging Assad's military capability while he fights ISIS would have helped ISIS.
Now, clearly it's a complex situation and war is unpredictable so something could have happened with the opposite effect, but helping somebody by bombing their enemy seems like a fairly straightforward causal mechanism.
ICM is a stinger for the government. Its the polling company with the best numbers usually for the government and they have Labour ahead by 7 points. I am almost tempted to call it an outlier, since the other pollsters haven't recorded any dramatic movement over Warsi.
I think the previous poll was an outlier the other way - both polls do kind of concur with a Labour lead of 3.5 still though. Just at the edges of the share limits for both of them.
I think ICM's methodology is broken regarding UKIP vs Lib Dem though and despite Populus and ICM showing LD ahead I'll be confident of my LD-UKIP match bet (For UKIP) to win if the final ICM & Populus polls for LD/UKIP has LD 2 points ahead on GE night.
Comments
I must say the descent in Kenya recently has been shocking and tragic. Doubly so because the nasties are getting nearer (in fact are in or adjacent to) the tourist areas which will mean less revenue for the "normal" people who rely on foreign visitors for their livelihoods.
Really a very sad situation all round.
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2014/08/the-strange-sad-story-of-the-us-armys-new-billion-dollar-camo-pattern/
Is it really that hard, or is this a classic case of snafu by committee?
Mind, many of us either had, or would go on to have, summer jobs on Southend Sea Front, where even then there wasn’t a lot left to the imagination.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6EPEOYl2A
Galloway from 44.45 on top form.
268 days and counting http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?day=7&month=5&msg=UK+General+Election&p0=0&year=2015
Mike - you've missed the key word LABOUR, as inserted above, in your intro piece.
That puts a decisive end for the second time (Hegel after the Battle of Jena and Fukuyama after the cold war) of the end of history.
Salmond is convinced that it is of paramount importance that Scotland keeps the pound, logic, therefore, demands that he casts his vote for No in the imminent referendum.
No stomach for a fight with UKIP....???
Pupil: Um, I'm not quite Chaucer!
De-lousing?
After all, we should only intervene if we are sure we will not make matters worse, and that where we can make a clear strategic difference we do so. Even if we know that the conflict will spread further, and more will die.
You a warmonger sir, and a friend of ISIL!
(At least, according to one esteemed poster fpt, who would rather sit back with whisky in hand whilst more people die and a caliphate is created).
Of course given that you know absolutely nothing about the situation on the ground and try to pontificate from an arm chair and since this doesn't fit with your desire to present anyone who disagrees with your views as anti-interventionist under any circumstances, I am sure you will once again ignore these facts.
It is sad that you have now had to resort to outright lies and smear - particularly since it is all so easily checked on the previous thread. It just shows what a moronic attitude you have to such a serious matter.
Sorry, I canna keep up with this thread - and you're mentioning Scotland (and I felt my duty as a PB Scot, Yadda, yadda, yadda....)
Oh woe!
Oh woe!
And at the core, it's all Miliband's fault. By his actions last year, he stopped us from cutting out the cancer before it spread, and made it harder for us to intervene in any meaningful way.
And he wants to be PM...
I'm really at a loss about what we can do. Our enemy has ground, money, influence, and increasing numbers. The west is weak about the Syria/Iraq and Ukrainian situations. The enemies of our values smell that weakness, and for once are willing to exploit it.
I was against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and I've been proven right every time
This is different. This is more like Sierra Leone or Rwanda. Get bombing.
Oh and let's not forget Hezbollah down in south Lebanon.
You keep going on about bombing Assad and how that would have changed everything. So tell me, since you know so much about it (and yes that was sarcasm) just who or what exactly would you have bombed that would have stopped this happening? Hezbollah in Lebanon? Some Russian advisors manning anti-aircraft missile batteries around Damascus? The Assad troops who were actually fighting against the extremist groups who would become ISIS in eastern Syria?
Or maybe with your amazing powers of perception you would have bombed the extremists who would later become ISIS... except of course they were fighting against Assad not for him so you would have been helping him.
Your position was and is incoherent, ill informed and moronic.
Oh those heady days of mid-May, three crossovers in as many days and PB Hodges declaring Swingback crossover with a Cameroon surge will now lead to a Tory majority....oh, how we laughed. They were there at the top of the hill, Tory majority in sight and whooshh, before you know it, the lot of them tumbled right back down. These random rare crossover polls are entertaining, if only to see the shares in PB Hodges tissues go through the roof as they get premature polling crossover ejaculation.
This is just a tax on poor people who can only afford to buy drink cheap stuff.
Compouter2 - TBF, that was a fun 3 days - Surely, we can All agree on that.
More importantly it is also different in one other way. Funnily enough because Islamic State have been so successful and well organised they are actually an easier target. This is not so much of an incoherent civil war where no one is clear where the front lines are as it was in Syria. The presence of US forces/advisors in Irbil makes it much easier to coordinate strikes.
Funnily enough the one thing that we could do to help is the one thing Josias doesn't want us to do which is to arm and supply the Kurds. Diplomatically and logistically that may be difficult given the objections from Turkey but tactically it has to be the right thing to do.
there have been three crossover polls out of one hundred and sixteen since the last one in May.
OOOOOHHH I can feel the tightening.
In a boost for Labour, which is embarking on a pre-election summer campaign called The Choice, the party has seen its support increase by five points over the last month to 38%, a share it last recorded in March. The Tories see their support fall by three points to 31% – last recorded in June – giving Labour a seven-point lead. In last month's Guardian / ICM poll the Tories had a one-point lead over Labour – 34% to 33%.
The Liberal Democrats are unchanged on 12%, while Ukip sees a one-point increase in its support to 10%.
The poll, carried out between Friday and Sunday, followed a difficult week for the prime minister after Warsi resigned from the government after criticising the prime minister for his "morally indefensible" decision not to criticise Israel for disproportionate action in Gaza. On Wednesday Boris Johnson signalled his intention to return to parliament at next year's general election, placing him in a strong position to replace the prime minister.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/11/labour-soar-past-tories-seven-point-lead-icm-poll
Seriously though, good poll for the Reds.
Inevitable. Always happens. I've run the simulation 24 trillion times, it took more time than the Universe has been in existence. Murdoch's Ed smears will come and save us.
Have I missed anything?
Show me the Gold Standard Crossover.......Show me the Gold Standard Crossover!
I better not tell Basil, he will be suicidal.
I for one would be happy to see British squaddies on the ground serving these evil c**** their arses.
"I'm really at a loss about what we can do."
That's the key point, isn't it? Just what can we do? I see the RAF flew a transport plane to where the people are stuck on a mountain. The plane was full of water, tents, food and all sorts of goodies that the people need. When it got there they decided it would be hazardous to the people on the ground to drop the stuff, so they brought it all the way home again. If we cannot even organise a supply drop we have no chance of doing anything aggressive.
To do anything useful first requires political leadership and grip. Cameron is PM and can't do anything unless Clegg agrees even if he wanted to. Chances of anything real happening? Not high, I would suggest.
And yet clearly ISIS are able to find buyers for their oil and also get it transported out of the country. So the real question that ought to be asked is who is buying the oil from them and what can be done to stop them.
And we know how he treated the situation a year ago.
Just beat the rain to the front door this evening so that's a result of sorts.
ICM is, as always, fascinating - the combined Conservative/UKIP share is just 41% (compared with Populus at 45%) which must be one of the lowest recorded for some time.
On matters IS, like most other people, I've no answers. My only thought is in warfare the only two approaches that work are all or nothing. Again, as others have said, we may be compelled to ally with those we have previously never considered as such. "My enemy's enemy is my friend" is a maxim that is often used - it applies to the relationship with Stalin's USSR from 1941.
The other truth is that we have propped up some deeply unpleasant individuals simply because they functioned as a bulwark against a greater threat. Mobutu and Marcos would be two good examples of that in the Cold War period. The world may have changed but the principle probably hasn't.
ICM Guardian poll changes
CON 31-3
LAB 38 +5
LD 12=
UKIP 10+1
TickTock....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-27047856
and the Saudis moved 30,000 troops to their border with Iraq in July
http://news.yahoo.com/saudi-arabia-deploys-30-000-soldiers-border-iraq-070023046.html
so I think it's possible that some of the parties who were very happy with Isis fighting Assad in Syria became less keen when it blew back over the border.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/icm
Mind you in August 2009 the Conservatives had a 13% lead.
As to what to strike: tactical strikes to punish Assad for the use of chemical weapons (a hideous crime you utterly ignore), and to 'persuade' him to stand down, ideally to Russia or a.n.other.
As I said at the beginning of this discussion: it's difficult to see how we could have made the situation worse than it is now, and easy to see how we could have improved it. That, it seems, is our biggest difference.
You have yet to show how you mantra of 'clear strategic difference' and 'be sure that we do not make matters worse' can ever be met. Heck, they might not even have been met over the Falklands crisis.
I also fail to see how they meet the current situation, either.
Andrew Neil explores what an independent Scotland would mean for Wales, England and Northern Ireland. He considers everything from the future of the armed forces and nuclear deterrent, to the UK's place at the international top table, as well as the fate of the union flag and the ramifications for the entire British political landscape.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes-Picot
The Islamic State (ISIS) has vowed to bring an end to the borders drawn by the Sykes-Picot agreement. "This is not the first border we will break, we will break other borders," a jihadist from the ISIS warned in the video called End of Sykes-Picot.[46] Islamic State's leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a July 2014 speech at the Grand Mosque in Mosul vowed that "this blessed advance will not stop until we hit the last nail in the coffin of the Sykes-Picot conspiracy".[47][48]
I've got no idea what's right to do. It's a mess.
Whereas you seemed to know the conflict would spread, and that more would die, yet were willing to do nothing.
Someone might ask Cameron about his soft power scheme. Surely the DfID should be stopping this sort of thing happening. Justine Greening has sent me a tweet this afternoon saying she is releasing £3m to the charities and NGOs that are already on the ground and so saving lives. Who those charities & NGOs are I have no idea. She also mentions the air drop, but doesn't mention health and safety stopped it actually happening.
Its the polling company with the best numbers usually for the government and they have Labour ahead by 7 points.
I am almost tempted to call it an outlier, since the other pollsters haven't recorded any dramatic movement over Warsi.
But I think you'll find I was the first to admit it was good for the Reds, so ner ner!!
Of course I hope you're right.
Now, clearly it's a complex situation and war is unpredictable so something could have happened with the opposite effect, but helping somebody by bombing their enemy seems like a fairly straightforward causal mechanism.
The US has enough planes so if they want anything it would probably only be extra secret squirrels anyway.
(If Maliki holds on then Iran will do the same for Baghdad. If he doesn't then the US will.)
Then see who Isis doesn't attack (and/or buys their oil) and ask them nicely to stop supporting them please.
I think ICM's methodology is broken regarding UKIP vs Lib Dem though and despite Populus and ICM showing LD ahead I'll be confident of my LD-UKIP match bet (For UKIP) to win if the final ICM & Populus polls for LD/UKIP has LD 2 points ahead on GE night.