So gap year jihadis go away for a spot of rape n pillage, decide that the ones they are raping n pillaging are not the ones they intended to rape n pillage, want to come home and be all cuddly fluffy bunny rabbit again - but their mean nasty overlords who they had no idea were mean n nasty said they couldn't and now they're in a bit of a corner.
You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh.
Or its all bullshit and they are just using it as a pretense to enter the UK and continue their terrorist activities here on the streets of Britain. I'm not convinced by this sudden change of heart, I'm with Socrates. They made their bed and now must lie in it. If they wish to come back they should be charged with treason and locked up for eternity.
Do you realise how much it costs to put someone through prison? It's more than it costs to put them through Eton. I don't want to foot that bill thanks -pull up the drawbridge please.
Do you believe Britain should honour international treaties it has signed? Or is the word of the British government no longer something that we should rely on?
I don't know what planet you're living on, but I haven't relied on the word of the British Government since about 1994. International law is constantly interpreted and reinterpreted (let me know if you require recent examples) and in this case a way must be found.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Though it's not a subject I know much about, perhaps there's not much they'd be able to contribute which isn't already well understood through other sources or means.
This is what I can never work out when the west are alternately arming and bombing various different factions of religious nutjobs. Is it some incredibly cold, cynical, complex geopolitical Diplomacy game played under the cover of high principle, or do the people in charge just have absolutely no idea what the fuck they're doing?
They've made their beds. Now they can lie in them.
Yes, perfectly sensible, we should actively encourage them to stay out there raping and slaughtering and what not.
At least we can bomb them out there, rather than spreading their violence back in London.
Yes, that's exactly what the world needs - more terrorism and more bombing. Did you even read the article before your knee jerked or is that a physical impossibility?
As the Times pointed out, these chaps do want to undergo deradicalisation and submit to surveillance.
Perhaps it is the surveillance element Socrates is objecting to.
You really believe that after going through a government "deradicalisation course" they'll say "Oh, sorry! I had it all wrong! Western democracy is actually a brilliant thing." They're saying what they know the government wants to hear to get back into the country. The government would be endangering British lives to let them back in.
While that's going to be true of some, there will also be others who arrive in the Middle East not quite realising they are going to be joining a dark ages collective which goes round beheading people for the slightest reasons. That combined with a near constant fear of death, may persuade quite a few that Jihadism sounded more romantic in Rotherham than it turned out to be.
What should we do with these people?
Kill them.
Under what legal provision?
Bomb them back to the stone ages where they belong. As for making them stateless just tell the UN to do one. If other countries want to take these idiots in let them do it. They are a danger to society here and do not deserve British citizenship.
Though it's not a subject I know much about, perhaps there's not much they'd be able to contribute which isn't already well understood through other sources or means.
This is what I can never work out when the west are alternately arming and bombing various different factions of religious nutjobs. Is it some incredibly cold, cynical, complex geopolitical Diplomacy game played under the cover of high principle, or do the people in charge just have absolutely no idea what the fuck they're doing?
Good question.
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
@FalseFlag Russia never put enough forces to take Mariupol, in both attacks last week and this they moved too slow and with inadequate forces, yesterday they said they had 6000 troops and about 60 tanks, attacking on the eastern side where it is imposible to go through due to local geography. How can they take a city which is guarded by 30000 troops and about 100 armoured vehicles with such paltry numbers.
It was like the Battle of the Bulge and characteristic of the failure of russian military thinking throughout the war.
The first Russo-Ukrainian war is over. "Agence France-Presse @AFP · 7m #BREAKING Ukraine, rebels agree ceasefire from Friday: rebels"
Overall I declare it an ukrainian victory. Russia will have to exclude the civilian leadership from military affairs if it wants to avoid another defeat like that.
Well lets prepare for the second Russo-Ukrainian war, the ukrainian victory will make both sides more willing to fight another one down the line.
Russia has lost 5 percent of its ground forces? What are you talking about?
I kept a daily record of how many units were lost from each sides.
Ukraine turned the tide early in the summer because they mobilised but the russians did not. As a result the russians suffered great loses until they decided that they had to reinforce their positions in august, but they were still outnumbered about 1 to 4, hence the russian version of the battle of the bulge in Mariupol. The ukrainian air force was effectively grounded by anti aircraft missiles after mid July, but the ground forces took the vast majority of loses after mid august as the russian reinforcements took them by surprise.
Here are 6 lessons from the war:
Lesson 1: Always mobilise as fast as you can. Lesson 2: Put the war ahead of politics. Lesson 3: Anti air missiles can ground a superior air force. Lesson 4: Artillery is still useless. Lesson 5. Mechanised units in large numbers are still the best in a ground war. Lesson 6: Always have enough troops to guard the front.
Bizarre, the rebels strategically withdrew as they did not initially have the numbers so narrowed the front. They also needed to capture arms from the government forces as well as organise and train their own fighters, not all are ex Ukrainian army or served back in the day with the Red Army. Kiev gambled on a quick victory which spread themselves too thin and wasted their front line units. Added to their higher morale and local knowledge/assistance the rebels won victory after victory. The first major counter offensive has seen the government forces collapse.
The government forces have lost a staggering number of troops and material. The ceasefire has come about as the government is incapable of undertaking offensive operations and it is now clear they cannot militarily conquer the Donbass. The only thing stopping the rebels is the lack of numbers.
I note no evidence of official Russian troop official involvement has been provided.
The first Russo-Ukrainian war is over. "Agence France-Presse @AFP · 7m #BREAKING Ukraine, rebels agree ceasefire from Friday: rebels"
Ukraine lost about 1/6th of its airforce and 1/10th of its ground forces. Russia lost about 5% of its ground forces. The russian strategy failed completely as they were always outnumbered (case in point Mariupol 30000 ukranians vs 6000 russians). Russia has gained only 15000 sq. Km with a population of around 3-4 million, including Donetsk and Luhansk cities but I doubt they will keep it in the ceasefire deal.
Overall I declare it an ukrainian victory. Russia will have to exclude the civilian leadership from military affairs if it wants to avoid another defeat like that.
Well lets prepare for the second Russo-Ukrainian war, the ukrainian victory will make both sides more willing to fight another one down the line.
Russia has lost 5 percent of its ground forces? What are you talking about?
I kept a daily record of how many units were lost from each sides.
Ukraine turned the tide early in the summer because they mobilised but the russians did not. As a result the russians suffered great loses until they decided that they had to reinforce their positions in august, but they were still outnumbered about 1 to 4, hence the russian version of the battle of the bulge in Mariupol. The ukrainian air force was effectively grounded by anti aircraft missiles after mid July, but the ground forces took the vast majority of loses after mid august as the russian reinforcements took them by surprise.
Here are 6 lessons from the war:
Lesson 1: Always mobilise as fast as you can. Lesson 2: Put the war ahead of politics. Lesson 3: Anti air missiles can ground a superior air force. Lesson 4: Artillery is still useless. Lesson 5. Mechanised units in large numbers are still the best in a ground war. Lesson 6: Always have enough troops to guard the front.
I take it you're referring to the rebels? I don't think anyone would deny they have been supported by Russia to a greater or lesser extent, but to state that 'Russia' has lost 5 percent of its ground troops is ridiculous. Call them seperatists or something if you wish to denote your dissaproval.
Regardless what share of them actually came from the Russian armed forces, they are clearly fighting on behalf of Russia.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
I think the phrase you were looking for was wishful thinking.
So gap year jihadis go away for a spot of rape n pillage, decide that the ones they are raping n pillaging are not the ones they intended to rape n pillage, want to come home and be all cuddly fluffy bunny rabbit again - but their mean nasty overlords who they had no idea were mean n nasty said they couldn't and now they're in a bit of a corner.
You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh.
Or its all bullshit and they are just using it as a pretense to enter the UK and continue their terrorist activities here on the streets of Britain. I'm not convinced by this sudden change of heart, I'm with Socrates. They made their bed and now must lie in it. If they wish to come back they should be charged with treason and locked up for eternity.
Do you realise how much it costs to put someone through prison? It's more than it costs to put them through Eton. I don't want to foot that bill thanks -pull up the drawbridge please.
Do you believe Britain should honour international treaties it has signed? Or is the word of the British government no longer something that we should rely on?
I don't know what planet you're living on, but I haven't relied on the word of the British Government since about 1994. International law is constantly interpreted and reinterpreted (let me know if you require recent examples) and in this case a way must be found.
We are a signatory to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.
There is no reintpretation. We would need to withdraw from that, which have other implications given that it is bound up with other treaties we have signed.
Really, it is terribly simple: either we believe in the rule of law, or we do not.
Though it's not a subject I know much about, perhaps there's not much they'd be able to contribute which isn't already well understood through other sources or means.
This is what I can never work out when the west are alternately arming and bombing various different factions of religious nutjobs. Is it some incredibly cold, cynical, complex geopolitical Diplomacy game played under the cover of high principle, or do the people in charge just have absolutely no idea what the fuck they're doing?
Good question.
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
yup, CIA stoners with x-boxes (really fancy CIA-grade ones) playing war games
A Le Pen presidency would be brilliant for France.
Sure I disagree with pretty much all she says, certanly the protectionist / statist economic policy and the outright nasty social ones - the 'let's get out of the Euro' policy is her only saving grace. But...the French political elite and establishment are ossified beyond belief. They badly need some sort of nuclear explosion to blow away their fusty old worldview and kick 'em in the nuts. This she would deliver in spades.
Vote Fascist! says Patrick.
Moral bankruptcy of the left, let's have more of the same failed policies of the past 50 years.
Le Pen President and Scotland independent, it's the dream.
Did you also like Le Pen's father?
Yes, more of a Poujadist than his daughter. I am a fan of both though as I am the French, they are very French rightists.
Do you think he was right when he said the French national football team had too many non-white players? What about when he said Sarkozy was a "foreigner" because he was of immigrant background?
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Alternatively, if we actually show some backbone in resisting Islamism, at home and abroad, Muslims worldwide might realise that
1. they've pushed liberal tolerance to the edge and they can't go on claiming special privileges in western societies and that
2, if they go out to fight for brutal Nazi theocracies which aim to assault the west they will very likely die.
These seem to be good lessons, for us and for them.
Muslims are no more a homogeneous group than thriller writers.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
The killers of Lee Rigby worked 'with us'. As did Abu Khatada. We are not short of these people willing to take MI5's coin. What we need is to stop funding flowing to these groups from KSA. Stop funding for the radicalistion of British Muslims via Mosques flowing from KSA. Kick out preachers of hate (immediately, not 20 years later). Cease to subsidise and or tolerate the creation of cultural enclaves within the UK with values that are contrary to our hard won liberties. And in the long term strive to build a positive notion of British culture and values that people want to buy into.
None of these solutions involve letting people who've been members of a blood soaked terrorist army back in to walk the streets. Defending a 'nuanced' approach to this is raving nuts.
So gap year jihadis go away for a spot of rape n pillage, decide that the ones they are raping n pillaging are not the ones they intended to rape n pillage, want to come home and be all cuddly fluffy bunny rabbit again - but their mean nasty overlords who they had no idea were mean n nasty said they couldn't and now they're in a bit of a corner.
You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh.
Or its all bullshit and they are just using it as a pretense to enter the UK and continue their terrorist activities here on the streets of Britain. I'm not convinced by this sudden change of heart, I'm with Socrates. They made their bed and now must lie in it. If they wish to come back they should be charged with treason and locked up for eternity.
A year ago David Cameron wanted to bomb Assad, the person these guys went out originally to fight against.
They were and are on the same side as Dave
Did Cameron actually condone british citizens to go to Syria and join militias to fight? If he did, he's an idiot. Joining any armed organisation should be viewed unfavourably (especially foreign country's armed forces, since it usually implies swearing an oath of allegiance to that foreign power).
They've made their beds. Now they can lie in them.
Yes, perfectly sensible, we should actively encourage them to stay out there raping and slaughtering and what not.
At least we can bomb them out there, rather than spreading their violence back in London.
Yes, that's exactly what the world needs - more terrorism and more bombing. Did you even read the article before your knee jerked or is that a physical impossibility?
As the Times pointed out, these chaps do want to undergo deradicalisation and submit to surveillance.
Perhaps it is the surveillance element Socrates is objecting to.
You really believe that after going through a government "deradicalisation course" they'll say "Oh, sorry! I had it all wrong! Western democracy is actually a brilliant thing." They're saying what they know the government wants to hear to get back into the country. The government would be endangering British lives to let them back in.
While that's going to be true of some, there will also be others who arrive in the Middle East not quite realising they are going to be joining a dark ages collective which goes round beheading people for the slightest reasons. That combined with a near constant fear of death, may persuade quite a few that Jihadism sounded more romantic in Rotherham than it turned out to be.
What should we do with these people?
Kill them.
Under what legal provision?
They have surely put themselves outside the law? In Iraq or Syria or wherever and fighting for ISIS they are clearly not within the remit of any legal framework. The actions of military forces for nation states acting against paramilitary / militia forces of no nation state (Al Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS, blah blah blah) are governed entirely by their own nation's rules and the Hague convention. Bombing these people is not different in any way from a drone strike on the Taliban or special forces taking out Bin Laden. If the government / military chain of command decides enemy combatants can be hit then they can.
The problems would only begin if we were stupid enough to readmit these c*&^s back into the UK - as then UK domestic law over its citizens would apply.
A Le Pen presidency would be brilliant for France.
Sure I disagree with pretty much all she says, certanly the protectionist / statist economic policy and the outright nasty social ones - the 'let's get out of the Euro' policy is her only saving grace. But...the French political elite and establishment are ossified beyond belief. They badly need some sort of nuclear explosion to blow away their fusty old worldview and kick 'em in the nuts. This she would deliver in spades.
Vote Fascist! says Patrick.
Moral bankruptcy of the left, let's have more of the same failed policies of the past 50 years.
Le Pen President and Scotland independent, it's the dream.
Did you also like Le Pen's father?
While Marine Le Pen is significantly less bad than her father, many of her closest advisers have publically said things that fit rather better with the BNP than any serious British political party (Conservative, Labour, or UKIP).
And I think a return to outright protectionism in one of our near neighbours would be an utter disaster for the UK and Europe.
Such a shame France does't have a sensible Eurosceptic party like AfD or UKIP.
Obviously UKIP and AfD are far preferable to FN.
But, a French government that was determined to leave the EU and Eurozone would be good news for this country, IMHO.
I think a collapse of free trade across Europe would be a bad thing for the UK.
Non free-trading Eurosceptics are not good neighbours. A non free-trading Eurosceptic who believed that France's economic problems were due to insufficient regulation and Anglo Saxon capitalism would not be good for anyone.
@FalseFlag Russia never put enough forces to take Mariupol, in both attacks last week and this they moved too slow and with inadequate forces, yesterday they said they had 6000 troops and about 60 tanks, attacking on the eastern side where it is imposible to go through due to local geography. How can they take a city which is guarded by 30000 troops and about 100 armoured vehicles with such paltry numbers.
It was like the Battle of the Bulge and characteristic of the failure of russian military thinking throughout the war.
They only started moving on Mariupol yesterday, having partially surrounded it earlier in the week, Artillery and Grad strikes, ably assisted by the pro separatist populace acting as spotters started yesterday evening in the outskirts. Not convinced the rebels have the strength to take it but the government forces might well just melt away, the Azov neo-Nazis might make a stand but have proven poor fighters.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Alternatively, if we actually show some backbone in resisting Islamism, at home and abroad, Muslims worldwide might realise that
1. they've pushed liberal tolerance to the edge and they can't go on claiming special privileges in western societies and that
2, if they go out to fight for brutal Nazi theocracies which aim to assault the west they will very likely die.
These seem to be good lessons, for us and for them.
Muslims are no more a homogeneous group than thriller writers.
Yet they seem awfully keen to see themselves as a homogenous group. They even have a word for it. The Ummah.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Alternatively, if we actually show some backbone in resisting Islamism, at home and abroad, Muslims worldwide might realise that
1. they've pushed liberal tolerance to the edge and they can't go on claiming special privileges in western societies and that
2, if they go out to fight for brutal Nazi theocracies which aim to assault the west they will very likely die.
These seem to be good lessons, for us and for them.
Muslims are no more a homogeneous group than thriller writers.
Yet they seem awfully keen to see themselves as a homogenous group. They even have a word for it. The Ummah.
Which would explain why the Sunnis are constantly at war with the Shi'ites, etc.
Apparently there is a word for the worldwide community of Christians, but no-one expects them to think as a single Borg-like being.
The first Russo-Ukrainian war is over. "Agence France-Presse @AFP · 7m #BREAKING Ukraine, rebels agree ceasefire from Friday: rebels"
Ukraine lost about 1/6th of its airforce and 1/10th of its ground forces. Russia lost about 5% of its ground forces. The russian strategy failed completely as they were always outnumbered (case in point Mariupol 30000 ukranians vs 6000 russians). Russia has gained only 15000 sq. Km with a population of around 3-4 million, including Donetsk and Luhansk cities but I doubt they will keep it in the ceasefire deal.
Overall I declare it an ukrainian victory. Russia will have to exclude the civilian leadership from military affairs if it wants to avoid another defeat like that.
Well lets prepare for the second Russo-Ukrainian war, the ukrainian victory will make both sides more willing to fight another one down the line.
Russia has lost 5 percent of its ground forces? What are you talking about?
I kept a daily record of how many units were lost from each sides.
Ukraine turned the tide early in the summer because they mobilised but the russians did not. As a result the russians suffered great loses until they decided that they had to reinforce their positions in august, but they were still outnumbered about 1 to 4, hence the russian version of the battle of the bulge in Mariupol. The ukrainian air force was effectively grounded by anti aircraft missiles after mid July, but the ground forces took the vast majority of loses after mid august as the russian reinforcements took them by surprise.
Here are 6 lessons from the war:
Lesson 1: Always mobilise as fast as you can. Lesson 2: Put the war ahead of politics. Lesson 3: Anti air missiles can ground a superior air force. Lesson 4: Artillery is still useless. Lesson 5. Mechanised units in large numbers are still the best in a ground war. Lesson 6: Always have enough troops to guard the front.
I take it you're referring to the rebels? I don't think anyone would deny they have been supported by Russia to a greater or lesser extent, but to state that 'Russia' has lost 5 percent of its ground troops is ridiculous. Call them seperatists or something if you wish to denote your dissaproval.
Regardless what share of them actually came from the Russian armed forces, they are clearly fighting on behalf of Russia.
I think they are mutually beneficial groups. It would be absurd to suggest there was no popular uprising, but equally absurd to suggest it could have been sustained and made the territorial gains it did without Russian support. Be that as it may, calling them 'Russians' is confusing. Russia has clearly not lost 5 percent of its army.
Watched much of P2. At the end McNish, who has a wise head on his shoulders*, reckoned Mercedes were fastest over one lap but on race pace lagged behind Williams (word of warning, though, it seems to be hard to overtake, which might yet give the advantage to Mercedes especially as it's expected to be one stop).
*I do hope we don't lose the Scottish members of the F1 team if Yes wins. They really are the best thing about BBC coverage. Lee McKenzie should've got the main presenter gig rather than Suzi Perry, Coulthard's got a good eye for the race and McNish knows his beans.
So gap year jihadis go away for a spot of rape n pillage, decide that the ones they are raping n pillaging are not the ones they intended to rape n pillage, want to come home and be all cuddly fluffy bunny rabbit again - but their mean nasty overlords who they had no idea were mean n nasty said they couldn't and now they're in a bit of a corner.
You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh.
Or its all bullshit and they are just using it as a pretense to enter the UK and continue their terrorist activities here on the streets of Britain. I'm not convinced by this sudden change of heart, I'm with Socrates. They made their bed and now must lie in it. If they wish to come back they should be charged with treason and locked up for eternity.
Do you realise how much it costs to put someone through prison? It's more than it costs to put them through Eton. I don't want to foot that bill thanks -pull up the drawbridge please.
Do you believe Britain should honour international treaties it has signed? Or is the word of the British government no longer something that we should rely on?
I don't know what planet you're living on, but I haven't relied on the word of the British Government since about 1994. International law is constantly interpreted and reinterpreted (let me know if you require recent examples) and in this case a way must be found.
We are a signatory to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.
There is no reintpretation. We would need to withdraw from that, which have other implications given that it is bound up with other treaties we have signed.
Really, it is terribly simple: either we believe in the rule of law, or we do not.
You clearly do not.
International law is an oxymoron. "War" is not. We are at war.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Ok, here's a compromise. Each one that successfully sells out three senior ISIS leaders to us, as well as undergoes the deradicalisation and surveillance, can come back.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Alternatively, if we actually show some backbone in resisting Islamism, at home and abroad, Muslims worldwide might realise that
1. they've pushed liberal tolerance to the edge and they can't go on claiming special privileges in western societies and that
2, if they go out to fight for brutal Nazi theocracies which aim to assault the west they will very likely die.
These seem to be good lessons, for us and for them.
Muslims are no more a homogeneous group than thriller writers.
Yet they seem awfully keen to see themselves as a homogenous group. They even have a word for it. The Ummah.
Good turnout for a Friday PMB - the key vote was 264-236 against a Tory move to punt it into the long grass. Usually PMBs only get 100-150 MPs present. As Neil observes, it's tokenism, but good practice for future possible coalition talks...
Hmm - good practice if Labour seriously intends to restore this manifestly unfair and wasteful subsidy, which I'd assumed was highly unlikely. It's very worrying indeed if Labour actually mean what they say; I'd always imagined they were secretly pleased that the Conservatives were sorting out this mess AND that they were pleased to make cheap political capital out of it. It never occurred to me that they actually meant it.
I'd always imagined they were secretly pleased that the Conservatives were sorting out this mess AND that they were pleased to make cheap political capital out of it. It never occurred to me that they actually meant it.
They can repeal this 'tax' while at the same time jacking up NI to 'save the NHS' and still be lauded by the BBC...
They've made their beds. Now they can lie in them.
Yes, perfectly sensible, we should actively encourage them to stay out there raping and slaughtering and what not.
At least we can bomb them out there, rather than spreading their violence back in London.
Yes, that's exactly what the world needs - more terrorism and more bombing. Did you even read the article before your knee jerked or is that a physical impossibility?
As the Times pointed out, these chaps do want to undergo deradicalisation and submit to surveillance.
Perhaps it is the surveillance element Socrates is objecting to.
You really believe that after going through a government "deradicalisation course" they'll say "Oh, sorry! I had it all wrong! Western democracy is actually a brilliant thing." They're saying what they know the government wants to hear to get back into the country. The government would be endangering British lives to let them back in.
While that's going to be true of some, there will also be others who arrive in the Middle East not quite realising they are going to be joining a dark ages collective which goes round beheading people for the slightest reasons. That combined with a near constant fear of death, may persuade quite a few that Jihadism sounded more romantic in Rotherham than it turned out to be.
Gavin Hewitt @BBCGavinHewitt 1h Angela Merkel - like the British - says new EU sanctions against Russia can be suspended if the crisis in Ukraine diminishes.#ukraine
The war is over so lets see how quickly the sanctions will be lifted.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Ok, here's a compromise. Each one that successfully sells out three senior ISIS leaders to us, as well as undergoes the deradicalisation and surveillance, can come back.
That might work if you're high up the military hierarchy, but what if you've ended up on traffic warden duty? Would it be enough to get one of their trucks towed away? Not just an ordinary one, I mean a nice white Toyota Hilux.
i think we can safely say that conservative Muslims from Pakistan and the Middle East have fairly homogenous beliefs, by definition. We can very definitely say that anyone who goes out to fight for ISIS belongs to a tightly-knit, ultra-homogenous group: the group of people who want to kill us.
So we kill them first. There. Yr moral quandaries are solved.
I always suspected you were a bit of an idiot, I am mildly dismayed that you are a *useful* idiot.
Some decisions are just terminally stupid. Travelling to a war zone to join a war which we are not directly involved in is one such decision...
i think we can safely say that conservative Muslims from Pakistan and the Middle East have fairly homogenous beliefs, by definition. We can very definitely say that anyone who goes out to fight for ISIS belongs to a tightly-knit, ultra-homogenous group: the group of people who want to kill us.
So we kill them first. There. Yr moral quandaries are solved.
I always suspected you were a bit of an idiot, I am mildly dismayed that you are a *useful* idiot.
Some decisions are just terminally stupid. Travelling to a war zone to join a war which we are not directly involved in is one such decision...
A Le Pen presidency would be brilliant for France.
Sure I disagree with pretty much all she says, certanly the protectionist / statist economic policy and the outright nasty social ones - the 'let's get out of the Euro' policy is her only saving grace. But...the French political elite and establishment are ossified beyond belief. They badly need some sort of nuclear explosion to blow away their fusty old worldview and kick 'em in the nuts. This she would deliver in spades.
Vote Fascist! says Patrick.
Moral bankruptcy of the left, let's have more of the same failed policies of the past 50 years.
Le Pen President and Scotland independent, it's the dream.
Did you also like Le Pen's father?
Yes, more of a Poujadist than his daughter. I am a fan of both though as I am the French, they are very French rightists.
Do you think he was right when he said the French national football team had too many non-white players? What about when he said Sarkozy was a "foreigner" because he was of immigrant background?
Do you think there are too many French players on the French football team? Why do you think it is a moral imperative for there to be even less than there are already. Why is it unacceptable to you for the French to stand up for their own interests?
I like the French, I wish to see them continue to exist as a distinct people. Why don't you?
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Alternatively, if we actually show some backbone in resisting Islamism, at home and abroad, Muslims worldwide might realise that
1. they've pushed liberal tolerance to the edge and they can't go on claiming special privileges in western societies and that
2, if they go out to fight for brutal Nazi theocracies which aim to assault the west they will very likely die.
These seem to be good lessons, for us and for them.
Muslims are no more a homogeneous group than thriller writers.
Yet they seem awfully keen to see themselves as a homogenous group. They even have a word for it. The Ummah.
Which would explain why the Sunnis are constantly at war with the Shi'ites, etc.
Apparently there is a word for the worldwide community of Christians, but no-one expects them to think as a single Borg-like being.
i think we can safely say that conservative Muslims from Pakistan and the Middle East have fairly homogenous beliefs.
how about the Malaysians and they Chinese lads from Uighur(if that's how you spell it) and the Chechens. And the Kurds. and the Iranians
A Le Pen presidency would be brilliant for France.
Sure I disagree with pretty much all she says, certanly the protectionist / statist economic policy and the outright nasty social ones - the 'let's get out of the Euro' policy is her only saving grace. But...the French political elite and establishment are ossified beyond belief. They badly need some sort of nuclear explosion to blow away their fusty old worldview and kick 'em in the nuts. This she would deliver in spades.
Vote Fascist! says Patrick.
Moral bankruptcy of the left, let's have more of the same failed policies of the past 50 years.
Le Pen President and Scotland independent, it's the dream.
Did you also like Le Pen's father?
Yes, more of a Poujadist than his daughter. I am a fan of both though as I am the French, they are very French rightists.
Do you think he was right when he said the French national football team had too many non-white players? What about when he said Sarkozy was a "foreigner" because he was of immigrant background?
Do you think there are too many French players on the French football team? Why do you think it is a moral imperative for there to be even less than there are already. Why is it unacceptable to you for the French to stand up for their own interests?
I like the French, I wish to see them continue to exist as a distinct people. Why don't you?
Gavin Hewitt @BBCGavinHewitt 1h Angela Merkel - like the British - says new EU sanctions against Russia can be suspended if the crisis in Ukraine diminishes.#ukraine
The war is over so lets see how quickly the sanctions will be lifted.
We shouldn't even be fighting Putin anyway. He is our ally against Islamism. Besides, I like the guy, and I like Russians. Russians don't want to kill us. Or rape our kids.
Stop this stupid feud with Vlad and focus on the serious threat, at home and abroad.
I have some respect for Putin. He took over a country that was a basket case, and has both delivered high rates of economic growth, and done a good deal to restore Russia's geopolitical standing. Were I a Russian, I'd support him (not least, because I wouldn't want to fall from a high building or be poisoned with radiation).
But, that doesn't alter the fact that he does seem to pose an increasing threat to our Eastern European allies. We can't realistically do much about the Ukraine. But, we should certainly hold the line in the Baltic States.
What did they think they were going for -a teddy bears picnic? It has been standard FSA/Al Nusra/ISIS practise to use car bombs, kidnappings, beheadings, rapes, child soldiery, and (yes) wherever possible crude chemical attacks (blamed on Assad of course) since the very beginning of this conflict. And now it's all going a bit pear shaped -Assad winning, Iraqis and Kurds making gains, KSA distancing themselves, being bombed (a bit) by the US, it's all got too much for the poor dears.
Lucky,
Alternatively, if we actually show some backbone in resisting Islamism, at home and abroad, Muslims worldwide might realise that
1. they've pushed liberal tolerance to the edge and they can't go on claiming special privileges in western societies and that
2, if they go out to fight for brutal Nazi theocracies which aim to assault the west they will very likely die.
These seem to be good lessons, for us and for them.
Muslims are no more a homogeneous group than thriller writers.
Yet they seem awfully keen to see themselves as a homogenous group. They even have a word for it. The Ummah.
Which would explain why the Sunnis are constantly at war with the Shi'ites, etc.
Apparently there is a word for the worldwide community of Christians, but no-one expects them to think as a single Borg-like being.
i think we can safely say that conservative Muslims from Pakistan and the Middle East have fairly homogenous beliefs.
how about the Malaysians and they Chinese lads from Uighur(if that's how you spell it) and the Chechens. And the Kurds. and the Iranians
What about the Martians, or the elephants of Namibia? What is yr point?
I'm saying we have a problem at home with a homogenous group of conservative Muslims (mainly from Pakistan, but also Somalia, Kurdistan, etc) and we have a problem abroad with a very homogenous group: Islamist nutters who want to kill everyone, especially us.
point is they look homogenous, but its a recent development based on the popularity of certain groups or practices supported by our friendly allies the Saudis. Islamism is politics. terror politics, but politics all the same. Not an apocalyptic fight between good and evil. much more mundane than that
A Le Pen presidency would be brilliant for France.
Sure I disagree with pretty much all she says, certanly the protectionist / statist economic policy and the outright nasty social ones - the 'let's get out of the Euro' policy is her only saving grace. But...the French political elite and establishment are ossified beyond belief. They badly need some sort of nuclear explosion to blow away their fusty old worldview and kick 'em in the nuts. This she would deliver in spades.
Did you also like Le Pen's father?
Yes, more of a Poujadist than his daughter. I am a fan of both though as I am the French, they are very French rightists.
Do you think he was right when he said the French national football team had too many non-white players? What about when he said Sarkozy was a "foreigner" because he was of immigrant background?
Do you think there are too many French players on the French football team? Why do you think it is a moral imperative for there to be even less than there are already. Why is it unacceptable to you for the French to stand up for their own interests?
I like the French, I wish to see them continue to exist as a distinct people. Why don't you?
Some of Le Pen's "jokes" (eg about sticking Jewish opponents in ovens) are pretty foul.
Wonder if it were a female MP that defected if it would be ok to describe her as the rohypnol taker?
Well if they had, Roger Helmer would have come out in support of the female MP, or not.
Shame you can only see the partisan view of anything, you look very foolish, and aren't funny
, and you are defending an obvious double standard because you are a foolish partisan tory
You're the one who tried to make a partisan point, my point was, UKIP's record when it comes to comments about rape don't always paint the party in a good light.
Not just Roger Helmer, I'm just saying, UKIP can't play the homophobic/sexism card.
I cant criticise child rape jokes because I vote UKIP? Shows what an idiot you are
Hmm, you appear deeply uncomfortable with the comments by the ex UKIp county councillor and Clacton candidate Roger Lord, even going so far yesterday as to pretend he was actually
d people who love a bit of faux outrage when its their community that are being joked about join in..
Twats
Lord said he was supporting the local Lib Dem actually, I must have misread
Resorting to abuse, when you've lost the argument.
Who do you think you are, MalcolmG?
Where have I said rape is funny.
You haven't, others have and when I criticised them you brought Roger Helmer into it and said UKIP (I me I suppose) couldn't criticise rape
No I said kippers would look hypocritical. It wasn't just Roger Helmer, one of your donors said some interesting things as well. His name escapes me.
I know, the Greek guy
That's as maybe, but it mean I cant comment on it... if Roger Helmer or the Greek doner (kebab joke) said what I did you would have a point
Ken Clarke said similar things to Helmer, I wouldn't pull a Tory on here for saying the opposite to him
Don't see why you feel the need to argue with someone who thinks rape isn't a joking matter
No Ken Clarke did not say similar things to Helmer, even a rape victim initially upset by his comments, after meeting him comments and proposals were fair enough
Good turnout for a Friday PMB - the key vote was 264-236 against a Tory move to punt it into the long grass. Usually PMBs only get 100-150 MPs present. As Neil observes, it's tokenism, but good practice for future possible coalition talks...
Good turnout for a Friday PMB - the key vote was 264-236 against a Tory move to punt it into the long grass. Usually PMBs only get 100-150 MPs present. As Neil observes, it's tokenism, but good practice for future possible coalition talks...
It's not as if they have a Scottish referendum to win or anything.
Sarah Champion MP @SarahChampionMP 2m “@emmersonslaw: Fiona Woolf, former President of the Law Society. Very sharp woman.”>I'm sure is very capable, but is she credible?
Oh dear, Labour MP for Rotherham casts the first stone….
A Le Pen presidency would be brilliant for France.
Sure I disagree with pretty much all she says, certanly the protectionist / statist economic policy and the outright nasty social ones - the 'let's get out of the Euro' policy is her only saving grace. But...the French political elite and establishment are ossified beyond belief. They badly need some sort of nuclear explosion to blow away their fusty old worldview and kick 'em in the nuts. This she would deliver in spades.
Vote Fascist! says Patrick.
Moral bankruptcy of the left, let's have more of the same failed policies of the past 50 years.
Le Pen President and Scotland independent, it's the dream.
Did you also like Le Pen's father?
Yes, more of a Poujadist than his daughter. I am a fan of both though as I am the French, they are very French rightists.
Do you think he was right when he said the French national football team had too many non-white players? What about when he said Sarkozy was a "foreigner" because he was of immigrant background?
Do you think there are too many French players on the French football team? Why do you think it is a moral imperative for there to be even less than there are already. Why is it unacceptable to you for the French to stand up for their own interests?
I like the French, I wish to see them continue to exist as a distinct people. Why don't you?
I wasn't talking about the nationality of the players. I was talking about their race. Or are you meaning "white French for many generations" when you say "French"?
i think we can safely say that conservative Muslims from Pakistan and the Middle East have fairly homogenous beliefs, by definition. We can very definitely say that anyone who goes out to fight for ISIS belongs to a tightly-knit, ultra-homogenous group: the group of people who want to kill us.
So we kill them first. There. Yr moral quandaries are solved.
I always suspected you were a bit of an idiot, I am mildly dismayed that you are a *useful* idiot.
Some decisions are just terminally stupid. Travelling to a war zone to join a war which we are not directly involved in is one such decision...
Orwell was an idiot!
Orwell picked a side which had not explicitly threatened to attack the country and values he came from..
Sarah Champion MP @SarahChampionMP 2m “@emmersonslaw: Fiona Woolf, former President of the Law Society. Very sharp woman.”>I'm sure is very capable, but is she credible?
Oh dear, Labour MP for Rotherham casts the first stone….
Really, you'd think she'd know better and keep her head down.
Comments
I think that you, and most of the other denizens of this board, are extremely knowledgable about the world. You know what's going, because you constantly read, and you gather information from a wide range of sources.
Some of those who head to Syria are dumb and deluded. Other truly believe it is God's will that they should kill people who fail to adhere to exactly the same bunch of batshit rules they do.
It is also just possible that by not killing all of these people, we might persuade more of them to surrender, and we might be able get them to work for us - whether providing us with intelligence or in persuading people not to join up.
This may be a pipedream, but I think a more nuanced approach is not a bad idea.
Russia never put enough forces to take Mariupol, in both attacks last week and this they moved too slow and with inadequate forces, yesterday they said they had 6000 troops and about 60 tanks, attacking on the eastern side where it is imposible to go through due to local geography.
How can they take a city which is guarded by 30000 troops and about 100 armoured vehicles with such paltry numbers.
It was like the Battle of the Bulge and characteristic of the failure of russian military thinking throughout the war.
The government forces have lost a staggering number of troops and material. The ceasefire has come about as the government is incapable of undertaking offensive operations and it is now clear they cannot militarily conquer the Donbass. The only thing stopping the rebels is the lack of numbers.
I note no evidence of official Russian troop official involvement has been provided.
https://news.vice.com/article/the-all-american-life-and-death-of-eric-harroun
There is no reintpretation. We would need to withdraw from that, which have other implications given that it is bound up with other treaties we have signed.
Really, it is terribly simple: either we believe in the rule of law, or we do not.
You clearly do not.
None of these solutions involve letting people who've been members of a blood soaked terrorist army back in to walk the streets. Defending a 'nuanced' approach to this is raving nuts.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/09/04/david-cameron-was-humiliated-when-he-asked-britain-to-fight-assad-what-happens-now-with-islamic-state/
The problems would only begin if we were stupid enough to readmit these c*&^s back into the UK - as then UK domestic law over its citizens would apply.
Sean is right. But do it out there.
Non free-trading Eurosceptics are not good neighbours. A non free-trading Eurosceptic who believed that France's economic problems were due to insufficient regulation and Anglo Saxon capitalism would not be good for anyone.
Your enemy's enemy is not always your friend.
Apparently there is a word for the worldwide community of Christians, but no-one expects them to think as a single Borg-like being.
Watched much of P2. At the end McNish, who has a wise head on his shoulders*, reckoned Mercedes were fastest over one lap but on race pace lagged behind Williams (word of warning, though, it seems to be hard to overtake, which might yet give the advantage to Mercedes especially as it's expected to be one stop).
*I do hope we don't lose the Scottish members of the F1 team if Yes wins. They really are the best thing about BBC coverage. Lee McKenzie should've got the main presenter gig rather than Suzi Perry, Coulthard's got a good eye for the race and McNish knows his beans.
Or are treaties oxymoronic too?
Gavin Hewitt @BBCGavinHewitt 1h
Angela Merkel - like the British - says new EU sanctions against
Russia can be suspended if the crisis in Ukraine diminishes.#ukraine
The war is over so lets see how quickly the sanctions will be lifted.
Concerning Boris, I feel that his natural role is that of a court jester. No more. No less.
I like the French, I wish to see them continue to exist as a distinct people. Why don't you?
But, that doesn't alter the fact that he does seem to pose an increasing threat to our Eastern European allies. We can't realistically do much about the Ukraine. But, we should certainly hold the line in the Baltic States.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13544397
“@emmersonslaw: Fiona Woolf, former President of the Law Society. Very sharp woman.”>I'm sure is very capable, but is she credible?
Oh dear, Labour MP for Rotherham casts the first stone….