Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Winderemere, Bowness North By-Election Preview: August 29th

2»

Comments

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    Cameron as to go

    This is not a supply bill.
  • Options
    QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949

    Cameron as to go

    Cameron isn't going anywhere, almost certainly. This has all happened too quickly for his reputation to become staked on it, and Ed got a bloody nose too. Indeed, Labour's motion makes it much easier for Cameron to claim the Commons is simply anti-war instead of anti-him.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,869
    Weak. Weak Fookin Weak
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    Resign

    Who? You? Me?

  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,661
    Obama goes it alone now...
  • Options
    Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Where now? Its irrelevant, its what the US want to do. If they want to do it, they will.
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    Fucked!
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    RobD said:

    Cameron as to go

    This is not a supply bill.
    It's my opinion ;-)
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704

    Weak. Weak Fookin Weak

    Yep, that's Miliband all over, I agree
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    What a clown we have for a Prime Minister and thank God we have more sensible MPs than the Prime Minister and his deputy. A disaster for Clegg in my opinion
  • Options
    RedRag1RedRag1 Posts: 527
    The No's have it for the government bill.Cue lots of ..."well this vote didn't matter"...."he did better than Ed"...."It was actually a win for Cameron"....."Dave actually won, even though he didn't ...err....win".
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,031

    Anyone who uses the expression "WMDs" is either a propagandist or a buffoon. Chemical weapons are no more or less bad than other mundane weapons. Nuclear weapons are utterly catastrophic and could put an end to civilisatio nin the northern hemisphere. There is no honest reason to lump the two together: it's only done to give Western leaders an excuse to get their war on.

    I don't agree. You also missed a third: biological. The term 'NBC' refers to Nuclear, Biological and Chemical weapons, and all three are generally seen as WMD's.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapon_of_mass_destruction#Definitions_of_the_term
    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/108951/chemical-weapon/274179/Weapons-of-mass-destruction
    I'm quite familiar with NBC, thank you, but biological weapons are pretty much an irrelevance these days. WMD is just a term used to pretend that sarin and VX are super-duper scary, requiring extreme reactions. It's all bollocks, perpetrated by the cynical to gull the ignorant.
    Again, I disagree. So it seems does the international community.
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    Labour`s played a blinder!
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,661
    The Americans won't give a fig about this vote.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307
    Well I didn't expect that.

    So the Americans proceed without us.

    The breakdown of the votes will be interesting.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,869
    How badly can a PM misjudge the mood of a nation
  • Options
    New Thread
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    No wonder the Tories were slagging off Miliband...They knew they were outplayed
  • Options
    CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    My timeline is full of journo 'shock expletives'.
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,288
    Awkward for Cameron but better than winning tonight and then losing a higher profile set piece vote on military action next week.

    This kills it once and for all and quickly. Much, much neater.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @MShapland: The toxic legacy of Iraq - Britain's ability to defend the defenceless, trashed, a country kills its own citizens with WMD, we stand aside
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969
    SMukesh said:

    Fucked!

    How very pithy.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Cameron should RESIGN !!!!
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Pulpstar said:

    Staying seated on the green benches is fine I think. being AWOL is not. The effect is the same, but one shows you are abstaining with a conscience.

    Walking through both lobbies is the way to signal your active abstention, I believe.

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited August 2013
    This vote was lost in 2010. Realities of a hung parliament.

    Significant final point of order from Miliband. Forces Cameron to rule out royal prerogative.

    PM "gets" that the people and Parliament do not favour an attack.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    The porpoise is f*cked.

    Undoubtedly a setback.

    Will make Hague's task in the UNSC virtually impossible.

    Interesting to see what Obama does now. Much I guess will depend on Turkey and France.

    I rather fear we will be returning to this issue but I hope it won't be in response to continued and aggravated use of chemical weapons in Syria.

    Cameron has played it straight. The residual poison left by Blair is still corrosive.

  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Roger said:

    What a clown we have for a Prime Minister and thank God we have more sensible MPs than the Prime Minister and his deputy. A disaster for Clegg in my opinion

    Do you really think if ed miliband was PM now,he wouldn't be doing the same as this government,backing the Americans.

    If you do not,your a fool.

  • Options
    welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Misread the country and Parliament. I simply don't think most folk see it's in the UK's strategic interest.

    Surely this kills our involvement stone dead. Democracy in action: both propositions defeated. Masterful inactivity results. Good.
  • Options
    MBoyMBoy Posts: 104
    Scott_P said:

    @MShapland: The toxic legacy of Iraq - Britain's ability to defend the defenceless, trashed, a country kills its own citizens with WMD, we stand aside

    Spot on.
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Public opinion is key and it's also pretty damn clear.
    Tore ‏@potifar66 29 Jun

    New Opinion Poll: Majority of Britons against sending arms to #Syria rebels. So is parliament. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/poll-finds-most-britons-oppose-sending-arms-to-syrian-rebels-8679189.html
    Whoops! Sorry, that was back when Cammie was talking about sending arms to the rebels, not now that he says we aren't taking sides by planning to back up a couple of hundred or so cruise missiles aimed at Assad held areas and facilities.

    Here is some recent polling.
    YouGov/The Times poll finds support for firing UK missiles against Syria fell to 22%, from 25% on Tues opposition grew from 50 to 51%
    Which is not markedly different from US public opinion.
    David Archibald ‏@GlasgowsDA 26 Aug

    Reuters' opinion poll: overwhelming majority in the #US against intervention in #Syria. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-syria-crisis-usa-poll-idUKBRE97O00J20130825
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    James Forsyth @JGForsyth

    Miliband’s speech today wasn’t great. But he’s the big winner of today. It won’t be half as easy for Cameron to mock him as ‘weak’ now

  • Options
    Edin_RokzEdin_Rokz Posts: 516
    I'll agree that the Typhoon is not proven, but the Harriers were some thing else. I can still remember watching a Harrier being chased by an Argentinian Skyhawk . The Harrier went vertical, the Skyhawk carried on with a missile up its tailpipe.

    Of course, the US Marine Corps use only trash don't they? Why else would they buy our fleet of recently upgraded Harriers for spare parts which will keep there own planes flying for the next 20 years or so.
    saddened said:

    saddened said:

    RobD said:

    Who needs an aircraft carrier when you have an RAF base in Cyprus?

    True Akrotiri, does have the advantage of being local and unsinkable. But the discussion in this case revolves around surbitons remedial education requirements.
    saddened said:

    RobD said:

    Who needs an aircraft carrier when you have an RAF base in Cyprus?

    True Akrotiri, does have the advantage of being local and unsinkable. But the discussion in this case revolves around surbitons remedial education requirements.
    Using Cyprus as a base reminds me of when the Royal Navy's CVA-01 aircraft carrier was cancelled in 1963. To prove the case that land-based aircraft were better than a carrier, the RAF moved Australia 600 nautical miles so it was in range of the TSR-2 ...

    Allegedly, of course. :-)

    Such a shame that the TSR-2 was cancelled as well.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CVA-01
    http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cva01.htm
    Yes wouldn't be like the crabs to be less than honest to support their toys, think Typhoons and harrier.

  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Congrats on enough MPs having the guts to vote against the lies.

    The JIC paper was risible as evidence. YouTube, FFS...
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Tim and Smithson going to like this -

    Barry Gardiner MP @BarryGardiner

    Gove loses it in the lobby! Accusing colleagues of supporting Assad in a very high pitched voice.

  • Options
    UbarrowUbarrow Posts: 8
    Meanwhile in Bowness North, a Lib Dem hold with 61% of the vote
This discussion has been closed.