Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Commons might be about to vote for Syrian air strikes b

1234689

Comments

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @jreedmp: Every MP should answer the question, whatever their view on Syria, 'Do you support our action in Iraq?'
    It's critical.
    #Syria
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    The three quidders have turned British politics from 'which chap can get into the centre fast enough' to a bloodsport.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    Apparently it's something to do with the banks.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    Corbyn hasn't got answers to those who ask him to give way - so he has stopped giving way.

    A very poor Parliamentary performance by Corbyn.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @stellacreasy: For christs sake - I want to listen to debate in chamber but people ringing my office abusing my staff so dipping out to check ok! #syria
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    edited December 2015

    I really really don't think he should have given the name of that constituent whose family is in Raqqa

    What a moron....And we are briefing this idiot with sensitive security information every week. Even bloody Ed Miliband was this moronic.
  • Options
    Corbyn getting a bit angry....
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
  • Options

    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    At last! A sensible question from the SNP - Angus Robertson - what proportion of the 70,000 could be described as moderate, what fundamentalist.

    Much better than Salmond's 'hurt feelings' grand standings......

    Not sure how we'll know the exact split of that - are we going to drop a survey into all Al Nusra and FSA areas ?
    We have enough people on the ground to get a rough split. I also highly doubt that there are anything like 70,000 troops on the ground who are interested in defeating ISIS. If you include the regime forces, Hezbollah and the Iranian ground forces then it is possible, but I'm not sure the PM has said we are going to ally ourselves with them so they won't be in that figure.
    Having seen a documentary on some of the so called "moderates", there are plenty within those ranks who I don't fancy having around for tea.
    Would you like having Assad's lot around for tea? Or ISIL's lot?

    We're not looking for someone to bring home to meet our mother, we're looking for the best of the lot. Whether you'd want them around is neither here nor there sadly.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @DPJHodges: David Cameron's speech was undermined by his comments last night. Not his strongest. Corbyn's speech has been an insult to the House.

    @bbclaurak: Corbyn is on edge of losing control here ....
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    The Moggster is a master of the chamber.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    I really really don't think he should have given the name of that constituent whose family is in Raqqa

    Is Corbyn for real? I've been defending him lately, that'll learn me

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,171
    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    The fact they have a "Diversity Officer" in the first place is the problem.
    I'm currently in a Muslim but very diverse place. There will be plenty of massive Christmas trees up in public spaces here - as there were celebrations for Diwali last month. The idea that people of other religions will be offended by Christmas celebrations in the UK is complete bollox encouraged by the leftist 'offence industry'.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Scott_P said:

    @stellacreasy: For christs sake - I want to listen to debate in chamber but people ringing my office abusing my staff so dipping out to check ok! #syria

    She should just look after her staff - there is going to be nothing said in this pointless debate that will make any real difference.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @faisalislam: On a point of order Rees Mogg points out that Corbyn has not answered the repeated q on whether he backs airstrikes in Iraq ...
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Just tuning in - is it really as awful as it sounds on here? I've grown to dislike seeing Corbyn more than Gordon - and that's saying a lot.

    I'll need a stiff drink before tuning in to BBC Parly.
  • Options
    MikeK said:

    Sandpit said:

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    Since we name our planes after weather, perhaps we can have some Misty Fogs and Light Rains available too.

    What is the number of British planes available for Syria? The above numbers look pretty pathetic to me.
    The numbers given are the total numbers that will be available, assuming the eight Tornados currently in place continue. So a total crewed combat air force of 14 GR4 Tornados and a pair of Typhoons. Probably four to six planes flying each day.

    Two additional thoughts:

    The Germans have volunteered to provide some of their Tornados but only for reconnaissance duties, no combat. That ought to take some of the existing load off of the RAF element and free up more sorties for dropping stuff.

    The RAF Tornados now flying should have been retired from service by now, they have had their service life extended twice. In the 2010 strategic defence review Cameron and his sidekick said we would not need them.
    So an underfunded airforce sends outmoded and obsolescent aircraft into battle. Should as little as 4 planes get shot down, the RAF is crippled.
    Do any Syrians or the Daesh have anything capable of shooting down a Tornado? The only plane shot down in the last few months that I'm aware of was an old Ruski bomber that thought the Turkish wouldn't call their bluff.

    I'm sure the RAF have sufficient kit to keep a few Tonkas in the air, this war will about taking a small number of strategic targets rather than something of the scale of Iraq.
    MikeK is talking utter ignorant garbage as per usual.
    I certainly do not wish to see RAF casualties on any scale. However should the body bags start coming back will you look me in the eye @flightpath01
    Yes. How many body bags were there in Paris? Do you not see a need to fight this agression?
    How is it you cannot see this other than through the lense of trying to belittle the conservative party or our armedforces which with its brimstone missile is better equipped than at the time of the gulf war and the Falklands.
    Just go away.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @iainjwatson: So although its a free vote on the Labour benches, Jeremy Corbyn is arguing those MPs who vote for military action are in breach of policy
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    The Americans have recently been bombing the tankers which transport the oil. It was reported that they had previously been reluctant to do so because it would have involved the killing of "innocent" (but v well paid - $5000 a trip) civilian drivers. I think they drop leaflets before bombing now.

  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    watford30 said:

    MikeK said:

    watford30 said:

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    Since we name our planes after weather, perhaps we can have some Misty Fogs and Light Rains available too.

    What is the number of British planes available for Syria? The above numbers look pretty pathetic to me.
    The numbers given are the total numbers that will be available, assuming the eight Tornados currently in place continue. So a total crewed combat air force of 14 GR4 Tornados and a pair of Typhoons. Probably four to six planes flying each day.

    Two additional thoughts:

    The Germans have volunteered to provide some of their Tornados but only for reconnaissance duties, no combat. That ought to take some of the existing load off of the RAF element and free up more sorties for dropping stuff.

    The RAF Tornados now flying should have been retired from service by now, they have had their service life extended twice. In the 2010 strategic defence review Cameron and his sidekick said we would not need them.
    So an underfunded airforce sends outmoded and obsolescent aircraft into battle. Should as little as 4 planes get shot down, the RAF is crippled.
    Tornados remain a potent weapon of war, maintained, armed and operated to the highest standards by the RAF.

    Why do you insist on belittling and insulting those who fly and prepare these aircraft to carry out missions in hostile airspace?
    I'm not belittling and insulting and insulting any of our RAF brothers, only those that send brave flyers into battle in obsolescent aircraft; no matter how well maintained. What a twat you are @watford30.
    Yes you are, and I'm more than happy to call you out for it.
    What is your weapon @watford, jamrags at dawn? Get stuffed!
  • Options
    MikeK said:

    Jezzabel is a very poor orator. I was led to understand that he was a master of the art.

    A master debater, in fact
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @SusanCalman: I must applaud the BBC for this live episode of House of Cards. The SFX are great. Especially the discomfort on the Labour front bench.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    You want government veto of all council appointments ?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684

    I really really don't think he should have given the name of that constituent whose family is in Raqqa

    Hopefully they get out of there before ISIS find them and execute them for having a "traitor" in their family.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    Has Douglas Carswell said how he will vote? He voted in favour of action in Syria in 2013 IIRC.

    Still undecided, per his tweets, but affecting to be more convinced by the PM.
    Well that's another party split then, I think UKIP policy is against air strikes or any kind of intervention.
    Nope. It is against air strikes alone. Farage made clear a few days ago that UKIP are not opposed to intervention nor air strikes per se but they have to be as part of a coordinated effort in support of ground forces. His term was a 'grand coalition' including ground forces.
  • Options
    Hearing unconfirmed reports the PLP is to try and hold a vote on replacing Corbyn with an animatronic dog called Flopsy.

    Whilst incapable of enunciating spoken words, Flopsy has an impeccable record when it comes to opposing terrorism. Superior toilet training also means he is unlikely to shit all over his colleagues. Unlike the incumbent.
  • Options

    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    Apparently it's something to do with the banks.
    He went on a rant in an interview with LauraK last night about this. Apparently just like Charlotte Church and Prince Charles think the Syrian civil war is all about climate change, Jez thinks the fault lies with the "banksters".
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @MrJohnNicolson: Waves of hostility from the Labour backbenchers towards Corbyn. He is lonely at the dispatch box.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    As an aside the Typhoons were practicing air to air combat over the Lincoln Edge today. Actually quite strange to see how close they got to each other given that the main strategy seems to be stand off and use missiles. Also interesting to see how quickly they can turn and appear to stand still at times.

    The Typhoon does an annual display at the Dartmouth Regatta. The element of the display where it does its extremely slow fly pasts and then the way it stands on its tail and disappears from view in moments is a high point. Helluva piece of kit.
  • Options
    Patrick Wintour ‏@patrickwintour 52s53 seconds ago
    Corbyn should be honest and admit he is opposed to UK air strikes in Iraq. It is a logical and honourable view.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @rafaelbehr: Corbyn: 'I'm not giving way, I'm going to go on with my speech.' His leadership in summary.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Corbyn doing his grumpy Geography teacher schtick.
  • Options
    perdix said:

    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    The Americans have recently been bombing the tankers which transport the oil. It was reported that they had previously been reluctant to do so because it would have involved the killing of "innocent" (but v well paid - $5000 a trip) civilian drivers. I think they drop leaflets before bombing now.

    You can't fight a war like that. What are attack submarines for?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @ShippersUnbound: Debate so far: Cameron angered the house. Corbyn has lost the house.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    It's not really Cameron's fault, it is just the culture of these lefty councils, they waste so much on green initiatives, diversity initiatives and cut back on libraries, health and fitness and other much needed services.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,324

    perdix said:

    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    The Americans have recently been bombing the tankers which transport the oil. It was reported that they had previously been reluctant to do so because it would have involved the killing of "innocent" (but v well paid - $5000 a trip) civilian drivers. I think they drop leaflets before bombing now.

    You can't fight a war like that. What are attack submarines for?
    These are trucks, not ships!
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Urgh. Jamrags, really?
    MikeK said:

    watford30 said:

    MikeK said:

    watford30 said:

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    Since we name our planes after weather, perhaps we can have some Misty Fogs and Light Rains available too.

    What is the number of British planes available for Syria? The above numbers look pretty pathetic to me.
    The numbers given are the total numbers that will be available, assuming the eight Tornados currently in place continue. So a total crewed combat air force of 14 GR4 Tornados and a pair of Typhoons. Probably four to six planes flying each day.

    Two additional thoughts:

    The Germans have volunteered to provide some of their Tornados but only for reconnaissance duties, no combat. That ought to take some of the existing load off of the RAF element and free up more sorties for dropping stuff.

    The RAF Tornados now flying should have been retired from service by now, they have had their service life extended twice. In the 2010 strategic defence review Cameron and his sidekick said we would not need them.
    So an underfunded airforce sends outmoded and obsolescent aircraft into battle. Should as little as 4 planes get shot down, the RAF is crippled.
    Tornados remain a potent weapon of war, maintained, armed and operated to the highest standards by the RAF.

    Why do you insist on belittling and insulting those who fly and prepare these aircraft to carry out missions in hostile airspace?
    I'm not belittling and insulting and insulting any of our RAF brothers, only those that send brave flyers into battle in obsolescent aircraft; no matter how well maintained. What a twat you are @watford30.
    Yes you are, and I'm more than happy to call you out for it.
    What is your weapon @watford, jamrags at dawn? Get stuffed!
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    TGOHF said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    You want government veto of all council appointments ?
    No, I want us to stop spunking money on non jobs. That diversity officer could be doing something useful for the money.

  • Options

    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    At last! A sensible question from the SNP - Angus Robertson - what proportion of the 70,000 could be described as moderate, what fundamentalist.

    Much better than Salmond's 'hurt feelings' grand standings......

    Not sure how we'll know the exact split of that - are we going to drop a survey into all Al Nusra and FSA areas ?
    We have enough people on the ground to get a rough split. I also highly doubt that there are anything like 70,000 troops on the ground who are interested in defeating ISIS. If you include the regime forces, Hezbollah and the Iranian ground forces then it is possible, but I'm not sure the PM has said we are going to ally ourselves with them so they won't be in that figure.
    Having seen a documentary on some of the so called "moderates", there are plenty within those ranks who I don't fancy having around for tea.
    Would you like having Assad's lot around for tea? Or ISIL's lot?

    We're not looking for someone to bring home to meet our mother, we're looking for the best of the lot. Whether you'd want them around is neither here nor there sadly.
    My point was that this 70,000 rag bag assortment of groups contain quite a lot of people who aren't what we would describe as moderate. The Free Syrian Army is supposed to be all in favour of secularism, from the Vice film I watched on them they didn't do a very good job in illustrating that. And the Kurdish forces are made up of some banned terrorist groups and who also hate one another.

    That is all I was pointing out.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    perdix said:

    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    The Americans have recently been bombing the tankers which transport the oil. It was reported that they had previously been reluctant to do so because it would have involved the killing of "innocent" (but v well paid - $5000 a trip) civilian drivers. I think they drop leaflets before bombing now.

    The Russians don't bother with the leaflets....
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,355
    Alan Duncan has a knighthood? I missed that...
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    edited December 2015
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    It's not really Cameron's fault, it is just the culture of these lefty councils, they waste so much on green initiatives, diversity initiatives and cut back on libraries, health and fitness and other much needed services.
    Check my link down thread. Stoke plod, £200k on a new website, while cutting the plod numbers.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    That was a full on rant for a STW rally from Corbyn there.
    Scott_P said:

    @MrJohnNicolson: Waves of hostility from the Labour backbenchers towards Corbyn. He is lonely at the dispatch box.

  • Options

    As an aside the Typhoons were practicing air to air combat over the Lincoln Edge today. Actually quite strange to see how close they got to each other given that the main strategy seems to be stand off and use missiles. Also interesting to see how quickly they can turn and appear to stand still at times.

    The Typhoon does an annual display at the Dartmouth Regatta. The element of the display where it does its extremely slow fly pasts and then the way it stands on its tail and disappears from view in moments is a high point. Helluva piece of kit.
    Typhoons have ground attack capability now as well.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684

    MaxPB said:

    Has Douglas Carswell said how he will vote? He voted in favour of action in Syria in 2013 IIRC.

    Still undecided, per his tweets, but affecting to be more convinced by the PM.
    Well that's another party split then, I think UKIP policy is against air strikes or any kind of intervention.
    Nope. It is against air strikes alone. Farage made clear a few days ago that UKIP are not opposed to intervention nor air strikes per se but they have to be as part of a coordinated effort in support of ground forces. His term was a 'grand coalition' including ground forces.
    Isn't that the Ken Livingstone position? I don't disagree with it, but I don't see this country deploying ground forces for the foreseeable future, if there is a major terrorist attack by ISIS in the UK then I could see it, but as of now there doesn't seem to be much appetite among NATO to deploy troops to Syria and fight alongside the Russia/Iran/Assad alliance.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    It's not really Cameron's fault, it is just the culture of these lefty councils, they waste so much on green initiatives, diversity initiatives and cut back on libraries, health and fitness and other much needed services.
    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,171
    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    Half of me would like to think that the Saudi action in oversupplying oil to drive the US frackers out of business might start to turn opinion against them. The problem of course being that the average American just sees the resultant lower oil price as a good thing.

    Here in the UAE they've removed the long-established govt subsidy of petrol with almost no affect on the pump price, that will obviously change rapidly once the oil price goes back up!
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    perdix said:

    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    The Americans have recently been bombing the tankers which transport the oil. It was reported that they had previously been reluctant to do so because it would have involved the killing of "innocent" (but v well paid - $5000 a trip) civilian drivers. I think they drop leaflets before bombing now.

    You can't fight a war like that. What are attack submarines for?
    These are trucks, not ships!
    I was confused by "tankers". Road tankers must be quite easy targets.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,171
    dr_spyn said:

    twitter.com/stellacreasy/status/672036209808527360?lang=en

    Da new politics, innit.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    You want government veto of all council appointments ?
    He wants any feeble excuse to be anti Cameron.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    edited December 2015

    perdix said:

    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    The Americans have recently been bombing the tankers which transport the oil. It was reported that they had previously been reluctant to do so because it would have involved the killing of "innocent" (but v well paid - $5000 a trip) civilian drivers. I think they drop leaflets before bombing now.

    The Russians don't bother with the leaflets....
    You have got to be f##king me. There is no way anybody rocks up in ISIL controlled territory as an "innocent". It is about as believable as the excuse from the mother of the suicide bomber in Paris, he didn't mean to he just got a bit stressed.

    Yeah well I was backpacking around Syria on my gap yaahhhh and I ran out of cash. Then this nice man asked me if I would like to drive a truck. Nothing dodgy he said, just drive this truck to the border and they will give me $5k. I do wish he didn't keep shouting Allahu Akbar though, it gave me a right headache.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    Floater said:

    isam said:

    For people that live or work in or close to London, would you say bombing Syria will make you feel safer in the capital over the next month or so?

    You think we were safe before?

    Also do you think it's right that our actions or otherwise are dictated by fear?

    I don't think we were safe before, no

    But the question is "will we be safer or less safe if we bomb Syria"?

    It's not about fear, the governments job is to protect it's population, and so if bombing Syria increases the risk of an attack here, even if we were at risk before, then they are not doing their job

    Maybe it will make us safer, I am not closed minded about it, but it makes me feel less safe


    The problem with that argument is that is results in constant appeasement and inaction. When would we have stood up the Nazis? Warsaw, Paris or Watford Gap Service Station?

    A bigger problem with bombing Syria must be that - on its own - it will do little more than convert a few more of the local population into true Jihadis and kill a bunch of civilians.

    Just as ISIS bombing us doesn't make us think "You know what! Let's get out of the Middle East", I suspect us bombing ISIS won't make them think "You know what! Let's stop our war on the West."

    Bombing on its own is an irritant. It couldn't topple Nazi Germany. It couldn't win the war in Vietnam. I doubt it will be particularly effective here. Destroying ISIS probably requires boots o the ground, and a commitment from a wide range of countries to spend 25 years building up secular civil society in the region post an invasion. Are we up for that? Probably not. Yet, that is what is realistically required. Otherwise, we're beating our chest and making a big noise, but doing relatively little to stop ISIS.
    If there were as many Germans in England in 1939 as there are Muslims now, I think it would have been more difficult

    I am just asking questions that give me pause for thought... instinctively I think we should wipe them out.. but I don't trust my instincts!

    I get a feeling of our bombing being akin to pressing a switch that detonates a load of bombs that have been planted over here, but that's prob just being melodramatic
    There are 50 million Muslims living in Europe and North America.

    Over the last 15 years of Islamic terrorism (assuming we start with 9/11), there have been maybe a dozen individuals from those countries that have successfully initiated terrorist attacks.
    Thats a fair comment, but you really should include those unsuccessful people that we are aware of too.

    Saying that, this is not an excuse for inaction.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Corbyn had absolutely nothing to say about defeating terrorists.

    I wonder why not
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Has Douglas Carswell said how he will vote? He voted in favour of action in Syria in 2013 IIRC.

    Still undecided, per his tweets, but affecting to be more convinced by the PM.
    Well that's another party split then, I think UKIP policy is against air strikes or any kind of intervention.
    Nope. It is against air strikes alone. Farage made clear a few days ago that UKIP are not opposed to intervention nor air strikes per se but they have to be as part of a coordinated effort in support of ground forces. His term was a 'grand coalition' including ground forces.
    Isn't that the Ken Livingstone position? I don't disagree with it, but I don't see this country deploying ground forces for the foreseeable future, if there is a major terrorist attack by ISIS in the UK then I could see it, but as of now there doesn't seem to be much appetite among NATO to deploy troops to Syria and fight alongside the Russia/Iran/Assad alliance.
    I can't see how voting against air strikes now would help there to be a more coordinated attack in the future.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684
    Also, can someone explain to me why we have 150 or so very expensive Typhoon aircraft and yet we are deploying older Tornados to the theatre? Is the Typhoon not suited to the bombing campaign, I seem to remember it being used in Libya and it is a multi-role jet.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Perhaps they're ships of the desert :wink:

    rcs1000 said:

    perdix said:

    MaxPB said:

    Corbyn ignoring the very reasonable point about targeting oil supplies.

    Indeed, how can we target the oil sales without targeting the oil infrastructure? The US seem to be unwilling to bomb the oil infrastructure because it might piss off Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the Russians don't want to do it so that Assad will have an income stream should ISIS be defeated which leaves us and France to get on with it.
    The Americans have recently been bombing the tankers which transport the oil. It was reported that they had previously been reluctant to do so because it would have involved the killing of "innocent" (but v well paid - $5000 a trip) civilian drivers. I think they drop leaflets before bombing now.

    You can't fight a war like that. What are attack submarines for?
    These are trucks, not ships!
    I was confused by "tankers". Road tankers must be quite easy targets.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    It's not really Cameron's fault, it is just the culture of these lefty councils, they waste so much on green initiatives, diversity initiatives and cut back on libraries, health and fitness and other much needed services.
    Check my link down thread. Stoke plod, £200k on a new website, while cutting the plod numbers.
    No Conservative Police & Crime Commissioners then?

  • Options
    After the pretty dire performances two leaders, backbenchers appear to be raising the game - Sir Hunky Dunky much better than either......
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    TGOHF said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    We used to have a Left that liked to think it talked about issues (or "ishoos" as the late Tony Benn would have it). Now we have a Left that it is obsessed with its own feelings, particularly its hurt feelings.

    Politics as a branch of psychotherapy. Who would ever have thought that this was what a genuine Left-wing alternative meant.

    I guess it makes a change from claiming hurt on behalf of others, who actually don't give a s##t e.g the lefty councils who get their knickers in a twist about some Christmas tradition might offend some other faiths...when 99% of those supposed to be offend seem totally bemused by why the council seem to think that might be the case.

    In fact a Muslim friend of mine is most upset today over a Christmas tradition....her animatronic Santa has stopped working. She is way more into Christmas than me.
    A friend of mine had their secret santa at work cancelled by the diversity officer, she was unimpressed and now they have started an unofficial one with exactly the same people in it as last year, including two Muslims, a Buddhist and a Hindu. No one seemed that bothered according to her by the idea of of it being a Christian celebration, most just wanted to give a gift and go out for a drink while doing it.
    Please tell me this diversity officer is in the private sector, I hope we're not funding this sort of nonsense

    Sadly an inner London council.
    Disgusted but not surprised, so much for Cameron cutting the state.

    You want government veto of all council appointments ?
    He wants any feeble excuse to be anti Cameron.
    Typical response to a situation from tory lackies. I'd love to see the world through your eyes it would save forming an opinion of my own.

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Corbyn had absolutely nothing to say about defeating terrorists.

    I wonder why not

    Is he perhaps sympathetic?
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    watford30 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FFS

    Harry Cole
    Mark Serwotka said of targeting MPs homes: "We would like to see more of this kind of community campaigning, linking up with unions"

    Blocking roads and harassing neighbours who are as inconvenienced as the MPs if there are noisy crowds outsider their home can amount to offences. The police should take action to stop such offences happening.
    It's Terrorism.

    'the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.'
    Quite amazing really. You insult someone with a single word and you can be up in front of the beak. Threaten intimidation or violence and you get a taxpayers funded police escort
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,327

    SeanT said:

    What do you want? Area bombing? Firestorms in raqqa?

    It was always going to be like this. Selective bombing to degrade Isis leadership and infrastructure. As in Iraq. Which is why this debate is absurd - I watched the increasingly twattish Matthew Paris, on newsnight yesterday, as he chuntered on about bombs "raining down on Syria" and I decided he is either gaga, or lying.
    No actually. What needs to happen is the Kurds seal off the Turkish border. The Americans have killed 20,000+, but the foreign fighters and supplies keep coming and we know ISIL are also selling oil.

    The only people able to help the Kurds with air strikes are the US and the British. From an expert on the radio yesterday, they said with comms etc when it comes to calling in this stuff, they are the only really the two NATO nations that can work together safely in these conditions.

    The Kurds need to be able to call in these strikes as and when. We don't want a situation where they get a response sorry all our operatives are busy please call back later, like some Taxi firm on a Saturday night.
    It'd have to be both the Kurds and the Turks, because the Kurdish areas of Syria are in the east, not the west. Besides that, some Kurds have also allegedly been buying ISIS oil and selling it on to dealers in other countries, including Israel and surprisingly Turkey. So although Turkey distrusts the Kurds, they're happy to fund it by buying its oil!

    In fact, the PKK have long made money from illegal trade between the countries, in the same way the IRA made money from smuggling tobacco and diesel between Ireland and the north.

    Also, Assad has allegedly been buying ISIS oil.

    As ever, money makes for strange bedfellow.

    http://www.oilandgas360.com/kurdistan-region-reasserting-right-to-sell-oil-independent-of-iraq/

    The trade in oil will only be stopped by either capturing or destroying refineries, transport mechanism and pipelines (*), or by tackling the smugglers. And they are not necessarily within the control of the relevant governments.

    (*) Some hesitate about this due to the ecological damage, of all things.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Scott_P said:

    Corbyn had absolutely nothing to say about defeating terrorists.

    I wonder why not

    Is he perhaps sympathetic?
    No.

    Supportive.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    MaxPB said:

    Also, can someone explain to me why we have 150 or so very expensive Typhoon aircraft and yet we are deploying older Tornados to the theatre? Is the Typhoon not suited to the bombing campaign, I seem to remember it being used in Libya and it is a multi-role jet.

    The Typhoon aeronautics described below are fine and dandy in a contested airspace. When there is air superiority then a purpose built ground attack aircraft like the A10 Warthog is the bees knees. Slower, but better armoured and extremely capable against ground targets.
  • Options

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @DPJHodges: Former shadow cabinet member responds to Corbyn's speech. "The guy is just s**t".
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    Good speech imo from Alan Duncan
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Has Douglas Carswell said how he will vote? He voted in favour of action in Syria in 2013 IIRC.

    Still undecided, per his tweets, but affecting to be more convinced by the PM.
    Well that's another party split then, I think UKIP policy is against air strikes or any kind of intervention.
    Nope. It is against air strikes alone. Farage made clear a few days ago that UKIP are not opposed to intervention nor air strikes per se but they have to be as part of a coordinated effort in support of ground forces. His term was a 'grand coalition' including ground forces.
    Isn't that the Ken Livingstone position? I don't disagree with it, but I don't see this country deploying ground forces for the foreseeable future, if there is a major terrorist attack by ISIS in the UK then I could see it, but as of now there doesn't seem to be much appetite among NATO to deploy troops to Syria and fight alongside the Russia/Iran/Assad alliance.
    I can't see how voting against air strikes now would help there to be a more coordinated attack in the future.
    Indeed. Surely air strikes needs to be the first step, if the ground forces who are there are unable to retake ISIS held areas then we can put together a coalition for a ground invasion. Blocking military action now would be letting ISIS off the hook.
  • Options
    watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474

    Urgh. Jamrags, really?

    MikeK said:

    watford30 said:

    MikeK said:

    watford30 said:

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    Since we name our planes after weather, perhaps we can have some Misty Fogs and Light Rains available too.

    What is the number of British planes available for Syria? The above numbers look pretty pathetic to me.
    The numbers given are the total numbers that will be available, assuming the eight Tornados currently in place continue. So a total crewed combat air force of 14 GR4 Tornados and a pair of Typhoons. Probably four to six planes flying each day.

    Two additional thoughts:

    The Germans have volunteered to provide some of their Tornados but only for reconnaissance duties, no combat. That ought to take some of the existing load off of the RAF element and free up more sorties for dropping stuff.

    The RAF Tornados now flying should have been retired from service by now, they have had their service life extended twice. In the 2010 strategic defence review Cameron and his sidekick said we would not need them.
    So an underfunded airforce sends outmoded and obsolescent aircraft into battle. Should as little as 4 planes get shot down, the RAF is crippled.
    Tornados remain a potent weapon of war, maintained, armed and operated to the highest standards by the RAF.

    Why do you insist on belittling and insulting those who fly and prepare these aircraft to carry out missions in hostile airspace?
    I'm not belittling and insulting and insulting any of our RAF brothers, only those that send brave flyers into battle in obsolescent aircraft; no matter how well maintained. What a twat you are @watford30.
    Yes you are, and I'm more than happy to call you out for it.
    What is your weapon @watford, jamrags at dawn? Get stuffed!
    Matron's late back from the shops with MikeK's favourite Complan Chicken Soup, and he's gone all moody.
  • Options
    Wanderer said:

    Good speech imo from Alan Duncan

    Yes - lets hope the others that follow are as good - the HoC may yet rise to the occasion....

  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Unusual. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/12028313/syria-airstrikes-vote-live.html#update-20151202-1227
    Britain’s most senior Roman Catholic cleric, Cardinal Vincent Nichols, has signalled support for air strikes against the so-called Islamic State as long as they are part of a wider strategy to create safe spaces. The Cardinal, who is leader of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, visited refugee camps in the region earlier this year where he met Christian and Muslim refugees.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,327
    MaxPB said:

    Also, can someone explain to me why we have 150 or so very expensive Typhoon aircraft and yet we are deploying older Tornados to the theatre? Is the Typhoon not suited to the bombing campaign, I seem to remember it being used in Libya and it is a multi-role jet.

    The Raptor pod has not yet been integrated into the Typhoon's weapons because it is too large. Apparently.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    As an aside the Typhoons were practicing air to air combat over the Lincoln Edge today. Actually quite strange to see how close they got to each other given that the main strategy seems to be stand off and use missiles. Also interesting to see how quickly they can turn and appear to stand still at times.

    The Typhoon does an annual display at the Dartmouth Regatta. The element of the display where it does its extremely slow fly pasts and then the way it stands on its tail and disappears from view in moments is a high point. Helluva piece of kit.
    Typhoons have ground attack capability now as well.
    Yes but it still has not been qualified to use all the weapons that Ops like Syria and Iraq need, hence we are still using the Tonkas. Whether it ever will be I don't know. It is a stunning bit of kit but it was not designed as a mud mover and giving it a new in role mid-life may not be the best thing to do.

    However, as always it comes down to what the Treasury says, even if that works out more expensive in the end.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    edited December 2015

    SeanT said:

    What do you want? Area bombing? Firestorms in raqqa?

    It was always going to be like this. Selective bombing to degrade Isis leadership and infrastructure. As in Iraq. Which is why this debate is absurd - I watched the increasingly twattish Matthew Paris, on newsnight yesterday, as he chuntered on about bombs "raining down on Syria" and I decided he is either gaga, or lying.
    No actually. What needs to happen is the Kurds seal off the Turkish border. The Americans have killed 20,000+, but the foreign fighters and supplies keep coming and we know ISIL are also selling oil.

    The only people able to help the Kurds with air strikes are the US and the British. From an expert on the radio yesterday, they said with comms etc when it comes to calling in this stuff, they are the only really the two NATO nations that can work together safely in these conditions.

    The Kurds need to be able to call in these strikes as and when. We don't want a situation where they get a response sorry all our operatives are busy please call back later, like some Taxi firm on a Saturday night.
    It'd have to be both the Kurds and the Turks, because the Kurdish areas of Syria are in the east, not the west.
    I don't believe that is true now. I believe the past 2-3 months the Kurds have taken quite a lot of the border area now. They have pockets in the west (remember Kobane) and centre of the border, as well as their strong hold in the East. It hasn't been that well reported just how much progress the Kurds have made.

    Edit:...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War#/media/File:Syrian_civil_war.png

    As for the Kurds not being trustworthy etc. As stated in a previous post about the "moderates", no, even within the Kurds they hate one another. It is a total mess.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut

  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut

    The point is that now we have some direct democratic oversight through the PCCs. If you don't like the direction your local force is taking, you have the right to vote in someone who will do a better job.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,327

    SeanT said:

    What do you want? Area bombing? Firestorms in raqqa?

    It was always going to be like this. Selective bombing to degrade Isis leadership and infrastructure. As in Iraq. Which is why this debate is absurd - I watched the increasingly twattish Matthew Paris, on newsnight yesterday, as he chuntered on about bombs "raining down on Syria" and I decided he is either gaga, or lying.
    No actually. What needs to happen is the Kurds seal off the Turkish border. The Americans have killed 20,000+, but the foreign fighters and supplies keep coming and we know ISIL are also selling oil.

    The only people able to help the Kurds with air strikes are the US and the British. From an expert on the radio yesterday, they said with comms etc when it comes to calling in this stuff, they are the only really the two NATO nations that can work together safely in these conditions.

    The Kurds need to be able to call in these strikes as and when. We don't want a situation where they get a response sorry all our operatives are busy please call back later, like some Taxi firm on a Saturday night.
    It'd have to be both the Kurds and the Turks, because the Kurdish areas of Syria are in the east, not the west.
    I don't believe that is true now. I believe the past 2-3 months the Kurds have taken quite a lot of the border area now. They have pockets in the west (remember Kobane) and centre of the border, as well as their strong hold in the East.

    Edit:...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War#/media/File:Syrian_civil_war.png
    I'd forgotten that western pocket! Thanks.

    But the substantive point remains: they're not in control of all the Syrian-Turkey border. They are in control of all the Iraqi-Turkey border though.
  • Options

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut
    Justify things like not cutting local government funding to zero? This is a local government issue and you are being both deceitful (or ignorant) on funding and wrong on who is responsible.

    As for changing the issue once proven wrong I support the PCCs unlike what we were talking about.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    edited December 2015

    SeanT said:

    What do you want? Area bombing? Firestorms in raqqa?

    It was always going to be like this. Selective bombing to degrade Isis leadership and infrastructure. As in Iraq. Which is why this debate is absurd - I watched the increasingly twattish Matthew Paris, on newsnight yesterday, as he chuntered on about bombs "raining down on Syria" and I decided he is either gaga, or lying.
    No actually. What needs to happen is the Kurds seal off the Turkish border. The Americans have killed 20,000+, but the foreign fighters and supplies keep coming and we know ISIL are also selling oil.

    The only people able to help the Kurds with air strikes are the US and the British. From an expert on the radio yesterday, they said with comms etc when it comes to calling in this stuff, they are the only really the two NATO nations that can work together safely in these conditions.

    The Kurds need to be able to call in these strikes as and when. We don't want a situation where they get a response sorry all our operatives are busy please call back later, like some Taxi firm on a Saturday night.
    It'd have to be both the Kurds and the Turks, because the Kurdish areas of Syria are in the east, not the west.
    I don't believe that is true now. I believe the past 2-3 months the Kurds have taken quite a lot of the border area now. They have pockets in the west (remember Kobane) and centre of the border, as well as their strong hold in the East.

    Edit:...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War#/media/File:Syrian_civil_war.png
    I'd forgotten that western pocket! Thanks.

    But the substantive point remains: they're not in control of all the Syrian-Turkey border. They are in control of all the Iraqi-Turkey border though.
    No. But that I believe is what the US want to enable the Kurds to do, backed by the ability to call in airstrikes whenever they are required. Link up that remaining portion and cut off ISIL supply route. As at the moment it is just way too easy to resupply with new recruits.

    The Kurds have (mostly unreported) over the past few months gained a fair amount of territory from ISIL.

    If ultimately it will work to cut off ISIL, if the Kurds won't do dodgy deals etc, is another matter.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut

    The point is that now we have some direct democratic oversight through the PCCs. If you don't like the direction your local force is taking, you have the right to vote in someone who will do a better job.
    I don't want to vote for anybody, I want the money spent on policemen. The % turnout is so pitifully low you have to assume that virtually nobody cares.

  • Options
    dr_spyn said:
    There is clearly something deeply personal going on with Stella Creasy and the Left of the party.
  • Options

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut

    The point is that now we have some direct democratic oversight through the PCCs. If you don't like the direction your local force is taking, you have the right to vote in someone who will do a better job.
    The problem is certain people aren't happy if they're not complaining.

    Have no oversight over the Police and they're not happy. Given oversight over the Police and not happy. Something not even remotely related to the government - not happy. The issue doesn't matter.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,556
    MaxPB said:

    Also, can someone explain to me why we have 150 or so very expensive Typhoon aircraft and yet we are deploying older Tornados to the theatre? Is the Typhoon not suited to the bombing campaign, I seem to remember it being used in Libya and it is a multi-role jet.

    Tornado GR4 is mainly set up for ground attack, and Typhoon for air defence.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Re PCCs have a look at this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20374139

    Turnout was so low a "watchdog" is investigating. More money wasted as police funding is cut.

    Come on tories, can you defend this?
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    MaxPB said:

    Also, can someone explain to me why we have 150 or so very expensive Typhoon aircraft and yet we are deploying older Tornados to the theatre? Is the Typhoon not suited to the bombing campaign, I seem to remember it being used in Libya and it is a multi-role jet.

    The Raptor pod has not yet been integrated into the Typhoon's weapons because it is too large. Apparently.
    Brimstone has yet to be integrated with the Typhoon as well. A contract to do this was let earlier this year but I think it's going to be at least another couple of years before it enters service.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,327

    SeanT said:

    What do you want? Area bombing? Firestorms in raqqa?

    It was always going to be like this. Selective bombing to degrade Isis leadership and infrastructure. As in Iraq. Which is why this debate is absurd - I watched the increasingly twattish Matthew Paris, on newsnight yesterday, as he chuntered on about bombs "raining down on Syria" and I decided he is either gaga, or lying.
    No actually. What needs to happen is the Kurds seal off the Turkish border. The Americans have killed 20,000+, but the foreign fighters and supplies keep coming and we know ISIL are also selling oil.

    The only people able to help the Kurds with air strikes are the US and the British. From an expert on the radio yesterday, they said with comms etc when it comes to calling in this stuff, they are the only really the two NATO nations that can work together safely in these conditions.

    The Kurds need to be able to call in these strikes as and when. We don't want a situation where they get a response sorry all our operatives are busy please call back later, like some Taxi firm on a Saturday night.
    It'd have to be both the Kurds and the Turks, because the Kurdish areas of Syria are in the east, not the west.
    I don't believe that is true now. I believe the past 2-3 months the Kurds have taken quite a lot of the border area now. They have pockets in the west (remember Kobane) and centre of the border, as well as their strong hold in the East.

    Edit:...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War#/media/File:Syrian_civil_war.png
    I'd forgotten that western pocket! Thanks.

    But the substantive point remains: they're not in control of all the Syrian-Turkey border. They are in control of all the Iraqi-Turkey border though.
    No. But that I believe is what the US want to enable the Kurds to do, backed by the ability to call in airstrikes whenever they are required. Link up that remaining portion and cut off ISIL supply route. As at the moment it is just way too easy to resupply with new recruits.

    If it will work, if the Kurds won't do dodgy deals etc, is another matter.
    Your last sentence is the issue. It depends on how much we pay the Kurds to stop the traffic (which will not be their first priority), and how deeply embedded the smugglers are within the YPG, PKK and the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq.
  • Options
    So John Woodcock is the star so far of this debate it seems to me.
  • Options

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut

    The point is that now we have some direct democratic oversight through the PCCs. If you don't like the direction your local force is taking, you have the right to vote in someone who will do a better job.
    I don't want to vote for anybody, I want the money spent on policemen. The % turnout is so pitifully low you have to assume that virtually nobody cares.

    I couldn't care less about turnout. I cared so I voted, if people who don't care don't vote then so what? Let the people who care vote - over 5 million chose to vote so that's not nobody in my eyes.

    There will always be people in charge of the Police, always have been, so the suggestion the money should be spent on cops instead is a false dichotomy.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited December 2015

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    What stops the government passing an act of primary legislation restricting what local councils can spend their money on, these restrictions clearly exist to some extent now, local councils cant employ their own private armies or police forces, why not extend the list into areas of waste and PC idiocy ?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684

    dr_spyn said:
    There is clearly something deeply personal going on with Stella Creasy and the Left of the party.
    She is really out to the left as well so I don't understand the animosity. Maybe they see her as a potential rival to Corbyn.
  • Options
    Indigo said:

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    What stops the government passing an act of primary legislation restricting what local councils can spend their money on, these restrictions clearly exist to some extent now, local councils cant employ their own private armies or police forces, what not extend the list into areas of waste and PC idiocy ?
    The belief in local democracy?
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    "So while Corbyn’s leadership ratings have collapsed (see last post) his position on what is the key issue of the day is getting more support."

    Not necessarily true Mike. Support for airstrikes is falling, yes. There are multiple positions which would lead one to decide against, and only one of those equates to Corbyn's position.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Indigo said:

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    What stops the government passing an act of primary legislation restricting what local councils can spend their money on, these restrictions clearly exist to some extent now, local councils cant employ their own private armies or police forces, what not extend the list into areas of waste and PC idiocy ?
    The belief in local democracy?
    So let them employ their own police forces and armies then ?
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut

    The point is that now we have some direct democratic oversight through the PCCs. If you don't like the direction your local force is taking, you have the right to vote in someone who will do a better job.
    I don't want to vote for anybody, I want the money spent on policemen. The % turnout is so pitifully low you have to assume that virtually nobody cares.

    I couldn't care less about turnout. I cared so I voted, if people who don't care don't vote then so what? Let the people who care vote - over 5 million chose to vote so that's not nobody in my eyes.

    There will always be people in charge of the Police, always have been, so the suggestion the money should be spent on cops instead is a false dichotomy.
    Utter nonsense, did you read the link? Turnout is pathetic, few people care, money is wasted, police funding is cut, it says everything about modern tories that they defend this sort of thing. In a minute you'll be telling us the importance of cutting the deficit.

  • Options

    SeanT said:

    What do you want? Area bombing? Firestorms in raqqa?

    It was always going to be like this. Selective bombing to degrade Isis leadership and infrastructure. As in Iraq. Which is why this debate is absurd - I watched the increasingly twattish Matthew Paris, on newsnight yesterday, as he chuntered on about bombs "raining down on Syria" and I decided he is either gaga, or lying.
    No actually. What needs to happen is the Kurds seal off the Turkish border. The Americans have killed 20,000+, but the foreign fighters and supplies keep coming and we know ISIL are also selling oil.

    The only people able to help the Kurds with air strikes are the US and the British. From an expert on the radio yesterday, they said with comms etc when it comes to calling in this stuff, they are the only really the two NATO nations that can work together safely in these conditions.

    The Kurds need to be able to call in these strikes as and when. We don't want a situation where they get a response sorry all our operatives are busy please call back later, like some Taxi firm on a Saturday night.
    It'd have to be both the Kurds and the Turks, because the Kurdish areas of Syria are in the east, not the west. Besides that, some Kurds have also allegedly been buying ISIS oil and selling it on to dealers in other countries, including Israel and surprisingly Turkey. So although Turkey distrusts the Kurds, they're happy to fund it by buying its oil!

    In fact, the PKK have long made money from illegal trade between the countries, in the same way the IRA made money from smuggling tobacco and diesel between Ireland and the north.

    Also, Assad has allegedly been buying ISIS oil.

    As ever, money makes for strange bedfellow.

    http://www.oilandgas360.com/kurdistan-region-reasserting-right-to-sell-oil-independent-of-iraq/

    The trade in oil will only be stopped by either capturing or destroying refineries, transport mechanism and pipelines (*), or by tackling the smugglers. And they are not necessarily within the control of the relevant governments.

    (*) Some hesitate about this due to the ecological damage, of all things.
    Not sure why the Kurds would be buying oil from IS when they are having problems with selling enough of the stuff they are producing themselves. The Kurds are having to suspend production because they can't transport or sell the oil they produce from their own very extensive oil fields. And shutting down and restarting production is a hugely costly and potentially very damaging operation.
  • Options
    blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Indigo said:

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    What stops the government passing an act of primary legislation restricting what local councils can spend their money on, these restrictions clearly exist to some extent now, local councils cant employ their own private armies or police forces, why not extend the list into areas of waste and PC idiocy ?
    Well said sir, but remember its only loony left councils that waste money.

  • Options
    TomTom Posts: 273
    MaxPB said:

    dr_spyn said:
    There is clearly something deeply personal going on with Stella Creasy and the Left of the party.
    She is really out to the left as well so I don't understand the animosity. Maybe they see her as a potential rival to Corbyn.
    She is not well liked in the CLP by any part of the party - its not just the 3 quidders she's alienated most people. This has encouraged the ousters and according to NS there is some specific politics involving local councillors who have their eye on the seat.

    Obviously not helped by the wider atmosphere in the Party and Jeremy (Kinder, Gentler, We don't do personalities, he shares his sandwiches) Corbyn's not so veiled threats yesterday and encouragement of Momentum by those around him.

  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited December 2015

    Govt controls local govt budgets of course its his fault.

    No they simply don't. Local government raises a large portion of its funding directly and if it chooses to waste it then there is little Central government can do.
    Amazes me how the tories on here go out of their way to justify things. Its like those ridiculous PCCs, money that should be spent on coppers - guess who introduced them?

    B b b b b ut

    The point is that now we have some direct democratic oversight through the PCCs. If you don't like the direction your local force is taking, you have the right to vote in someone who will do a better job.
    I don't want to vote for anybody, I want the money spent on policemen. The % turnout is so pitifully low you have to assume that virtually nobody cares.

    I couldn't care less about turnout. I cared so I voted, if people who don't care don't vote then so what? Let the people who care vote - over 5 million chose to vote so that's not nobody in my eyes.

    There will always be people in charge of the Police, always have been, so the suggestion the money should be spent on cops instead is a false dichotomy.
    Utter nonsense, did you read the link? Turnout is pathetic, few people care, money is wasted, police funding is cut, it says everything about modern tories that they defend this sort of thing. In a minute you'll be telling us the importance of cutting the deficit.

    Cutting the deficit is an optional extra, did't you get the memo, the Osborne Blue Team winning is what matters even if to do so it has to become identical in many respects to the Red Team under Blair, including on current evidence, the same level of acquaintance with telling the truth to the voters.
This discussion has been closed.