I wonder if it's possible to read too much into the cancellation of Corbyn's visit. If any other party leader cancelled a visit to a seat they were defending you'd say that was evidence they expected to lose but with Corbyn it could be anything. Maybe the date clashed with the Friends of Hamas Bring & Buy Sale.
@JamesTapsfield: Benn: "I'm not going to resign because I'm doing my job as shadow foreign secretary"
Translation. I want to be the next leader when the dust settles from the coming implosion
What a spineless cretinous careerist.
Possibly. Or he may have made the assessment, probably fair, that the only chance of knitting the party together is for the Corbynistas to be able to get behind a member of Jeremy's shadow cabinet.
And/or as I said below, he doesn't want to give a free pass to Jeremy for any loss in Oldham. So he can join in the resignations en masse next Friday...
Gosh ... reading pb.com, it is obvious Corbyn and MacDonnell must be very, very bad people.
As bad as Senators Gruening and Morse.
They were the only two Senators that voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1962, which authorised the US involvement in the Vietnam War. They lost 88-2.
They suffered a tidal wave of abuse and both lost their seats at the next set of elections.
Of course, it all looks very different now ... Gruening and Morse are lauded as heroes, standing up against a jingoistic President and US public.
I suspect that Corbyn has called this right, and it will look different even in a years time.
I also suspect this is the worst of all fights that the Labour Right could have picked with the leadership.
Afghan 2001? Perhaps. Iraq? For sure. Afghan II? Can see it. Libya? Yep that also.
But not Syria. In fact it is a reverse-Iraq as effectively we will be sustaining the incumbent tyrant.
We have a group who have declared a caliphate and aim to fulfil the aspirations of Qutb, et al waging global jihad, er, globally.
This is not a war of imperialism. It is a war both to interdict and deplete IS. And to make people think twice if they fancy going there to join them.
Bollox, it is just jingoistic halfwits desperate to wave their willies , desperate because they cannot strut about and preen claiming to be a war leader. Heroes led by donkeys was never more true.
So much better to attend the unveiling of a portrait of yourself......
Gosh ... reading pb.com, it is obvious Corbyn and MacDonnell must be very, very bad people.
As bad as Senators Gruening and Morse.
They were the only two Senators that voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1962, which authorised the US involvement in the Vietnam War. They lost 88-2.
They suffered a tidal wave of abuse and both lost their seats at the next set of elections.
Of course, it all looks very different now ... Gruening and Morse are lauded as heroes, standing up against a jingoistic President and US public.
I suspect that Corbyn has called this right, and it will look different even in a years time.
I also suspect this is the worst of all fights that the Labour Right could have picked with the leadership.
Afghan 2001? Perhaps. Iraq? For sure. Afghan II? Can see it. Libya? Yep that also.
But not Syria. In fact it is a reverse-Iraq as effectively we will be sustaining the incumbent tyrant.
We have a group who have declared a caliphate and aim to fulfil the aspirations of Qutb, et al waging global jihad, er, globally.
This is not a war of imperialism. It is a war both to interdict and deplete IS. And to make people think twice if they fancy going there to join them.
Bollox, it is just jingoistic halfwits desperate to wave their willies , desperate because they cannot strut about and preen claiming to be a war leader. Heroes led by donkeys was never more true.
If it were a civil war between Assad & FSA, or even Assad & IS for control of Syria I would say: do nothing. Civil wars need to be won and lost and then we can move on and deal with the new order.
This is different. IS has global ambitions in terms of spreading terror and for us to ignore it, when it is on our streets, would be a dereliction of duty by our government. Let's suppose IS wins. The new caliphate is complete. Do you by any stretch of the imagination believe that will be that?
So will bombing defeat IS? Nope. Will it degrade them? Yes. Will it strongly disincentivise supporters from going to take part? I sincerely hope so.
@JPonpolitics: Lab MP John Spellar tells @bbc5live "If anyone resigns over this it should be Jeremy Corbyn"
Spellar has always been to the right of most Tories. He and JC have one thing in common: they never respect those with whom they disagree. Come to think of it, that's what goes on here most of the time, too.
I suspect that Corbyn has called this right, and it will look different even in a years time.
I also suspect this is the worst of all fights that the Labour Right could have picked with the leadership.
What in Corbyn's record persuaded you that he has "called this right"?
He called Iraq right.
He would have voted against Korea. Agqinst Aden. Against the confrontation with Indonesia. He is a pacifist, not a geopolitical genius. As it is we have democratic governments put there by elections in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
Watched the Livingstone thing this morning and showed it and the Times covereage of McMao to a work colleague whose father had been caught up in an IRA atrocity. Suffice to say I had to peel him off the wall.
I wonder how Labour will surprise us today?
Also wondering what number the Edstone sits at in the most WTF Labour moments, probably out of the top 10 now.
McDonnell supports the IRA Labour torn over Syria and in civil war Corbyn cancels visit to safe seat which is a 50/50 hold Red Ken supports the bombers more than those who were killed Labour loses more council seats in Scotland Corbyn stands against his cabinet and his SFSec Massive number of resignations threatened from ShadCab. Etc, etc, etc.
.......and that's a "less than optimal day" for the Labour leader?
If that's less than optimal , What the hell does a bad day look like?
Gosh ... reading pb.com, it is obvious Corbyn and MacDonnell must be very, very bad people.
As bad as Senators Gruening and Morse.
They were the only two Senators that voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1962, which authorised the US involvement in the Vietnam War. They lost 88-2.
They suffered a tidal wave of abuse and both lost their seats at the next set of elections.
Of course, it all looks very different now ... Gruening and Morse are lauded as heroes, standing up against a jingoistic President and US public.
I suspect that Corbyn has called this right, and it will look different even in a years time.
I also suspect this is the worst of all fights that the Labour Right could have picked with the leadership.
Afghan 2001? Perhaps. Iraq? For sure. Afghan II? Can see it. Libya? Yep that also.
But not Syria. In fact it is a reverse-Iraq as effectively we will be sustaining the incumbent tyrant.
We have a group who have declared a caliphate and aim to fulfil the aspirations of Qutb, et al waging global jihad, er, globally.
This is not a war of imperialism. It is a war both to interdict and deplete IS. And to make people think twice if they fancy going there to join them.
Bollox, it is just jingoistic halfwits desperate to wave their willies , desperate because they cannot strut about and preen claiming to be a war leader. Heroes led by donkeys was never more true.
So much better to attend the unveiling of a portrait of yourself......
Yes far better than listening to Cameron lying through his teeth , desperate to get attention. Bit like yourself as you know well the reason he was not there was due to hosting a reception for veterens from the Tories previous wars.
Even Cif doesn't dare open comments on their Ken/"gave their lives" article.
Has Milne been on the phone?
Corbyn may be right about the uncertainties of outcomes when a country goes to war. However Cameron may have a very odd definition of moderate when it comes to fighting Assaad.
2020 could be the GE the opposition lost from the morning of after the votes were counted in May 2015. When Ed Miliband stepped down, who would have thought that Labour were more concerned with its own destruction than developing policies to win back power.
There are decent people in the Labour party whom I admire, but Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell & Livingstone are none of them.
@PolhomeEditor: .@spellar didn't hold back on @bbc5live earlier: "What we’re seeing here is an attempted coup by Jeremy Corbyn and the people around him."
Gosh ... reading pb.com, it is obvious Corbyn and MacDonnell must be very, very bad people.
As bad as Senators Gruening and Morse.
They were the only two Senators that voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1962, which authorised the US involvement in the Vietnam War. They lost 88-2.
They suffered a tidal wave of abuse and both lost their seats at the next set of elections.
Of course, it all looks very different now ... Gruening and Morse are lauded as heroes, standing up against a jingoistic President and US public.
I suspect that Corbyn has called this right, and it will look different even in a years time.
I also suspect this is the worst of all fights that the Labour Right could have picked with the leadership.
Afghan 2001? Perhaps. Iraq? For sure. Afghan II? Can see it. Libya? Yep that also.
But not Syria. In fact it is a reverse-Iraq as effectively we will be sustaining the incumbent tyrant.
We have a group who have declared a caliphate and aim to fulfil the aspirations of Qutb, et al waging global jihad, er, globally.
This is not a war of imperialism. It is a war both to interdict and deplete IS. And to make people think twice if they fancy going there to join them.
Bollox, it is just jingoistic halfwits desperate to wave their willies , desperate because they cannot strut about and preen claiming to be a war leader. Heroes led by donkeys was never more true.
So much better to attend the unveiling of a portrait of yourself......
Yes far better than listening to Cameron lying through his teeth , desperate to get attention. Bit like yourself as you know well the reason he was not there was due to hosting a reception for veterens from the Tories previous wars.
An evening reception.......couldn't possibly have made it to Edinburgh in time.......
What the country needs is a new centrist party - maybe like Ciudadanos in Spain. They've grown very rapidly and look set to play a central role in any new govt after the Spanish GE. The current Labour party is dead in the water.
Ciudadanos are basically Cleggite LDs so can fall as much as they rise, while the PSOE is Labour's sister party Corbyn is closer to Podemos
The conservatives are the centrist party. The liberals/LDs are a rump ever since the 1920s and only flew high once because of a fluke. Labour and UKIP have become extremist factions, both looking like fighting over the same declining 'working class' vote.
We must always remember the names of Mohammad Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Germaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain, the four young men who died on 7/7.
They gave their lives so others might die.
The bastards.
Livingstone was disgusting last night. McDonnell is today revealed as an open advovate of IRA terrorism. Abbott has now said Mao did more good than harm.
Nick Palmer should feel ashamed for his choice of Labour leader this morning. He and 250,000 others knowingly put apologists for and supporters of cold blooded murderers in charge of their party. In doing so they have made it unelectable, disenfranchised millions of centre left voters and taken away any hope that an alternative to this Tory government might get a hearing.
They are contemptible; not only for their self indulgence, but also for their tolerance of what is now being said and done in Labour's name. Sorry to be personal, but if you are a Labour member and you are not genuinely sickened by what has happened over the last 24 hours then you are a lot worse than a mere useful idiot.
Southam - if the Labour party followed your ideals I could be tempted by it. Trouble is it isn't and hasn't been decent for years.
Ok, the poison under the surface is now clearly visible to all to see.
As for Palmer, I am not convinced he didn't get exactly the sort of party he always wanted.
So can anyone tell me what we are going to war with? A few extra Typhoons and Tornadoes? Dropping expensive hardware on decreasing number of value targets in an area awash with air fighter bombers from the US, Russia, Australia and France, with a very pissed off Turkey on the side.
What is our ultimate objective? How will we know it has been attained? How will our objectives mesh with the objectives of the other involved parties without us getting involved in a shoot out with our "allies" by accident?
When will we realise that to win against Daesh we will have to give them a propaganda victory by putting in ground troops? Have we started up the enlistment drive, cos I haven't seen one yet, or do we bring back the old favourite of the armchair brigade, conscription?
The Reservists not rushing to join the colours to replace all those regular military made redundant, have shown that the policy of passing out recruitment to the private sector has been a complete expensive failure (Private Eye passim). 40,000 increase promised, less than 400 increase over previous existing numbers. (People may be stupid some of the time, but not stupid enough to realise that they could be sent away at a moments notice for long periods of time to areas where other people are trying to do nasty things them, like kill.)
Has Cameron made the case? In my opinion, no. Not yet at least, but I'm sure a dossier of some kind will come to light, soon. My major concern is that he is concerned about his own legacy before he departs no. 10, and wants the title of War Leader (as per Blair, Thatcher and Churchill) added to being the PM who saved the UK.
So can anyone tell me what we are going to war with? A few extra Typhoons and Tornadoes? Dropping expensive hardware on decreasing number of value targets in an area awash with air fighter bombers from the US, Russia, Australia and France, with a very pissed off Turkey on the side.
What is our ultimate objective? How will we know it has been attained? How will our objectives mesh with the objectives of the other involved parties without us getting involved in a shoot out with our "allies" by accident?
When will we realise that to win against Daesh we will have to give them a propaganda victory by putting in ground troops? Have we started up the enlistment drive, cos I haven't seen one yet, or do we bring back the old favourite of the armchair brigade, conscription?
The Reservists not rushing to join the colours to replace all those regular military made redundant, have shown that the policy of passing out recruitment to the private sector has been a complete expensive failure (Private Eye passim). 40,000 increase promised, less than 400 increase over previous existing numbers. (People may be stupid some of the time, but not stupid enough to realise that they could be sent away at a moments notice for long periods of time to areas where other people are trying to do nasty things them, like kill.)
Has Cameron made the case? In my opinion, no. Not yet at least, but I'm sure a dossier of some kind will come to light, soon. My major concern is that he is concerned about his own legacy before he departs no. 10, and wants the title of War Leader (as per Blair, Thatcher and Churchill) added to being the PM who saved the UK.
That's about the size of it.
Don't start what you can't finish.
Da'esh's 5th column is already in Brussels and Birmingham &c.
The internet will turn out to be the means for the destruction of Western civilization.
That SDP2 needs to include an amalgamation with the LibDems to form a new Progressive Democrats. Both parties - Labour and LidDems - need to walk away from their recent past. Together, they could offer a ferocious opposition to an Osborne-led Tory party in 2020. Singly, they're each gonna get smashed up.
Yes that's plausible in theory. But take a look at the personalities in reality.
Most MPs, like most of the public they represent, are neither anti-war nor pro-war. They certainly have party loyalties that shape their calculations. But what was extremely clear from yesterday’s long debate was that the overwhelming majority were trying to do the right thing.
Doing the right thing is of course extraordinarily difficult in Syria. The situation is spectacularly dangerous and confusing, deeply rooted in ancient animosities and rivalries. The international configurations are volatile and full of risk. And the domestic blowback in all parts of the UK could also be lethal and arbitrary, as the Paris attacks showed. In such a globalised minefield, most MPs inevitably and sensibly step gingerly and uncertainly. Very few, though, think these are good enough reasons for doing nothing.
"Istanbul (AFP) - A court in Istanbul on Thursday charged two journalists from the opposition Cumhuriyet newspaper with spying after they alleged Turkey's secret services had sent arms to Islamist rebels in Syria, Turkish media reported.
Editor-in-chief Can Dundar and Erdem Gul, the paper's Ankara bureau chief, are accused of spying and "divulging state secrets", the reports said. Both men were placed in pre-trial detention."
So Erdogan denies the report last year, yet the trial is now proceeding on the basis that these journalists revealed state secrets.
It is becoming blatantly obvious to anyone that wants to see it that Turkey is arming Al-Nusra and their pet Turkmen and buying black market oil from ISIS. We should suspend Turkey's membership of NATO before they spark another showdown with Russia.
@JamesTapsfield: Benn: "I'm not going to resign because I'm doing my job as shadow foreign secretary"
Translation. I want to be the next leader when the dust settles from the coming implosion
What a spineless cretinous careerist.
Gutless; spineless.
The Benn tribe have been a blot on the landscape for years.
I only wish that we could find a way of outlawing political dynasties like this. It does our political system no good for families to act as if they had an entitlement to holding political office.
"I understand that the briefing - to which Corbyn allegedly turned up 15 minutes late -
made crystal clear where ISIL’s command and control centres were in Syria, and how they had directed terror across Europe. Our spooks know who they are, where they are and when they are there. Benn confirmed on the Today programme that the security briefing had made the ISIL threat to the UK ‘very clear’.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
Gosh ... reading pb.com, it is obvious Corbyn and MacDonnell must be very, very bad people.
As bad as Senators Gruening and Morse.
They were the only two Senators that voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1962, which authorised the US involvement in the Vietnam War. They lost 88-2.
They suffered a tidal wave of abuse and both lost their seats at the next set of elections.
Of course, it all looks very different now ... Gruening and Morse are lauded as heroes, standing up against a jingoistic President and US public.
I suspect that Corbyn has called this right, and it will look different even in a years time.
I also suspect this is the worst of all fights that the Labour Right could have picked with the leadership.
Afghan 2001? Perhaps. Iraq? For sure. Afghan II? Can see it. Libya? Yep that also.
But not Syria. In fact it is a reverse-Iraq as effectively we will be sustaining the incumbent tyrant.
We have a group who have declared a caliphate and aim to fulfil the aspirations of Qutb, et al waging global jihad, er, globally.
This is not a war of imperialism. It is a war both to interdict and deplete IS. And to make people think twice if they fancy going there to join them.
Bollox, it is just jingoistic halfwits desperate to wave their willies , desperate because they cannot strut about and preen claiming to be a war leader. Heroes led by donkeys was never more true.
It was never said in the first place. Your response is half witted. There is no evidence of jingoism all you are doing is making up a feeble excuse. What we have seen is mass murder in Paris amongst other places and regular mad insane choreographed slaughter by ISIS fed by ignorance and bigotey in the name of creating a despotic empire.
There are no tricky questions here, only thickos unable to read the exam paper.
What the country needs is a new centrist party - maybe like Ciudadanos in Spain. They've grown very rapidly and look set to play a central role in any new govt after the Spanish GE. The current Labour party is dead in the water.
Ciudadanos are basically Cleggite LDs so can fall as much as they rise, while the PSOE is Labour's sister party Corbyn is closer to Podemos
The conservatives are the centrist party. The liberals/LDs are a rump ever since the 1920s and only flew high once because of a fluke. Labour and UKIP have become extremist factions, both looking like fighting over the same declining 'working class' vote.
Tories only centrist at moment not under IDS for example
@JamesTapsfield: Benn: "I'm not going to resign because I'm doing my job as shadow foreign secretary"
Translation. I want to be the next leader when the dust settles from the coming implosion
What a spineless cretinous careerist.
Gutless; spineless.
The Benn tribe have been a blot on the landscape for years.
I only wish that we could find a way of outlawing political dynasties like this. It does our political system no good for families to act as if they had an entitlement to holding political office.
@JamesTapsfield: Benn: "I'm not going to resign because I'm doing my job as shadow foreign secretary"
Translation. I want to be the next leader when the dust settles from the coming implosion
What a spineless cretinous careerist.
Gutless; spineless.
The Benn tribe have been a blot on the landscape for years.
I only wish that we could find a way of outlawing political dynasties like this. It does our political system no good for families to act as if they had an entitlement to holding political office.
Up to voters they are not a monarchy
It isn't really up to voters, they can only vote for the people who are selected - it is the party hierarchies that control things.
"I understand that the briefing - to which Corbyn allegedly turned up 15 minutes late -
made crystal clear where ISIL’s command and control centres were in Syria, and how they had directed terror across Europe. Our spooks know who they are, where they are and when they are there. Benn confirmed on the Today programme that the security briefing had made the ISIL threat to the UK ‘very clear’.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
How should we respond to the French request for our assistance? We can, of course, refuse, but it would be a pretty huge rebuff.
Gosh ... reading pb.com, it is obvious Corbyn and MacDonnell must be very, very bad people.
As bad as Senators Gruening and Morse.
They were the only two Senators that voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1962, which authorised the US involvement in the Vietnam War. They lost 88-2.
They suffered a tidal wave of abuse and both lost their seats at the next set of elections.
Of course, it all looks very different now ... Gruening and Morse are lauded as heroes, standing up against a jingoistic President and US public.
I suspect that Corbyn has called this right, and it will look different even in a years time.
I also suspect this is the worst of all fights that the Labour Right could have picked with the leadership.
Afghan 2001? Perhaps. Iraq? For sure. Afghan II? Can see it. Libya? Yep that also.
But not Syria. In fact it is a reverse-Iraq as effectively we will be sustaining the incumbent tyrant.
We have a group who have declared a caliphate and aim to fulfil the aspirations of Qutb, et al waging global jihad, er, globally.
This is not a war of imperialism. It is a war both to interdict and deplete IS. And to make people think twice if they fancy going there to join them.
Why don't we want them to go over there and join them? People who think IS is such a good idea they'd like to live there are not going to easily integrate into our society.
Instead of arresting them for trying to join IS, just fly them over. Let them live with the consequences.
@2010LeeHurst: I think some Labour Party supporters are now experiencing the bile on Twitter from ultra leftists that everyone else has been treated to.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
We need a proper plan in Syria, one which doesn't involve removing Assad and dismantling the existing state. The plan from yesterday seems to have realised the mistakes from Iraq and Libya, but it doesn't take into account 4 years of Assad being at loggerheads with the so-called "moderate" opposition. The only way to stabilise Syria would be to wipe out all of the Islamist groups including ISIS, the Turkmen, al-Nusra, Islamic Conquest and others, put a few token FSA leaders into the Assad government and tell them to keep quiet while western aid budgets rebuild Syrian infrastructure. I'm not sure that is on the table, however, it has become clear that ISIS are a threat to us and our way of life, we can't sit on the sidelines while other nations defend our interests.
Sure we should bomb the bastards in Syria. But we do need a coherent strategy overall in the WoT. And that means we need to recognise and admit who our real enemies are. As a starter for 10 I'd put these on the list: 1. Active IS fighters - bit of a no brainer 2. The IS support community - for example nobody goes to Raqqa unless they have a basically evil intent. All the 'Jihadi wives', fellow travellers - the lot - are legitimate military targets 3. Saudi Arabia - they fund fundamental Wahhabi Islamism on a huge scale. Yet the west sells tham military kit and pretends they are not what they are. Insane. 4. Qatar - Awash in LNG money and funding and promoting our enemies. Deeply unpleasant and corrupt (not just football!). Yet, as per Saudi Arabia, we shamefully pretend otherwise. 5. Turkey - They protect and support IS. They buy their oil, and thus fund them too. They actively thwart the Kurds in their fight against IS. During the minute's silence for Paris a recent Turkish football crowd at an international game spent the whole minute shouting Allahu Akbar at the top of their voices. We should see them for what they are too. Muslims whose heart is not with us. Or their money. Or their army. WTF are they doing in NATO?
So...I fear we'll not man up to the job we actually face against an unrelenting, un-negotiable-with, unfeeling, medieval monster. Let's smash the monster - not just its outer tentacles.
"I understand that the briefing - to which Corbyn allegedly turned up 15 minutes late -
made crystal clear where ISIL’s command and control centres were in Syria, and how they had directed terror across Europe. Our spooks know who they are, where they are and when they are there. Benn confirmed on the Today programme that the security briefing had made the ISIL threat to the UK ‘very clear’.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
There are no easy or risk free options here.
Either the UK contributes militarily to the efforts to defeat ISIS in Syria or we rely on others to take the full burden whilst our citizens are beheaded in the middle east or murdered in overseas tourist attractions like Tunisia and potentially face a Paris like outrage in the UK.
In my view the do nothing situation in Syria is the worst of several extremely unenviable prospects.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
We need a proper plan in Syria, one which doesn't involve removing Assad and dismantling the existing state. The plan from yesterday seems to have realised the mistakes from Iraq and Libya, but it doesn't take into account 4 years of Assad being at loggerheads with the so-called "moderate" opposition. The only way to stabilise Syria would be to wipe out all of the Islamist groups including ISIS, the Turkmen, al-Nusra, Islamic Conquest and others, put a few token FSA leaders into the Assad government and tell them to keep quiet while western aid budgets rebuild Syrian infrastructure. I'm not sure that is on the table, however, it has become clear that ISIS are a threat to us and our way of life, we can't sit on the sidelines while other nations defend our interests.
Agree with this just about 100%.
Only thing is, according to eg. Chatham House, there are precious few FSA around these days. Finding "moderate" rebels might have to come from elsewhere.
If Dave had any sense, he'd put on his best union Jack underpants and get up there, pronto.
The last thing he wants is UKIP actually winning.
Agreed. An UKIP Oldham win is worse for the Tories than a LAB hold on a reduced majority.
I wonder if Anthony King will be on hand to proclaim it a "terrible night for the Tories".
I don't see why UKIP splitting the increasingly untenable Labour coalition (the working-class and the right-on) would worry Dave at all, in the long-term. It wins him a lot of marginals, might cost him one or two seats directly, and consigns Labour to a 1983-style defeat.
And the more UKIP are in the news the better Remain will do (I say that as a swing voter on the referendum).
@ScottyNational: Black Friday deal:Barrels of oil now $40 down from $113!Buy now whilst North Sea stocks last! *offer not to be used in conjunction with indy
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
How should we respond to the French request for our assistance? We can, of course, refuse, but it would be a pretty huge rebuff.
Moreover, we need British defence capabilities to win this war. The Royal Air Force is already in action over Iraq. Its involvement over Syria would make a practical difference. The RAF has significant capabilities for precision airstrikes, aerial reconnaissance and air-to-air refuelling support. On a daily basis, its Tornado aircraft and unmanned drones are causing very severe damage to Isis in Iraq. The use of these capabilities over Syria would put additional and extreme pressure on the Isis terror network.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
We need a proper plan in Syria, one which doesn't involve removing Assad and dismantling the existing state. The plan from yesterday seems to have realised the mistakes from Iraq and Libya, but it doesn't take into account 4 years of Assad being at loggerheads with the so-called "moderate" opposition. The only way to stabilise Syria would be to wipe out all of the Islamist groups including ISIS, the Turkmen, al-Nusra, Islamic Conquest and others, put a few token FSA leaders into the Assad government and tell them to keep quiet while western aid budgets rebuild Syrian infrastructure. I'm not sure that is on the table, however, it has become clear that ISIS are a threat to us and our way of life, we can't sit on the sidelines while other nations defend our interests.
@KennyFarq: "It appears some SNP parliamentary candidates were successfully vetted on the basis of a 30-minute phone interview." https://t.co/RMzFQpT4Ov
Sure we should bomb the bastards in Syria. But we do need a coherent strategy overall in the WoT. And that means we need to recognise and admit who our real enemies are. As a starter for 10 I'd put these on the list: 1. Active IS fighters - bit of a no brainer 2. The IS support community - for example nobody goes to Raqqa unless they have a basically evil intent. All the 'Jihadi wives', fellow travellers - the lot - are legitimate military targets 3. Saudi Arabia - they fund fundamental Wahhabi Islamism on a huge scale. Yet the west sells tham military kit and pretends they are not what they are. Insane. 4. Qatar - Awash in LNG money and funding and promoting our enemies. Deeply unpleasant and corrupt (not just football!). Yet, as per Saudi Arabia, we shamefully pretend otherwise. 5. Turkey - They protect and support IS. They buy their oil, and thus fund them too. They actively thwart the Kurds in their fight against IS. During the minute's silence for Paris a recent Turkish football crowd at an international game spent the whole minute shouting Allahu Akbar at the top of their voices. We should see them for what they are too. Muslims whose heart is not with us. Or their money. Or their army. WTF are they doing in NATO?
So...I fear we'll not man up to the job we actually face against an unrelenting, un-negotiable-with, unfeeling, medieval monster. Let's smash the monster - not just its outer tentacles.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
We need a proper plan in Syria, one which doesn't involve removing Assad and dismantling the existing state. The plan from yesterday seems to have realised the mistakes from Iraq and Libya, but it doesn't take into account 4 years of Assad being at loggerheads with the so-called "moderate" opposition. The only way to stabilise Syria would be to wipe out all of the Islamist groups including ISIS, the Turkmen, al-Nusra, Islamic Conquest and others, put a few token FSA leaders into the Assad government and tell them to keep quiet while western aid budgets rebuild Syrian infrastructure. I'm not sure that is on the table, however, it has become clear that ISIS are a threat to us and our way of life, we can't sit on the sidelines while other nations defend our interests.
If Dave had any sense, he'd put on his best union Jack underpants and get up there, pronto.
The last thing he wants is UKIP actually winning.
Agreed. An UKIP Oldham win is worse for the Tories than a LAB hold on a reduced majority.
I wonder if Anthony King will be on hand to proclaim it a "terrible night for the Tories".
I don't see why UKIP splitting the increasingly untenable Labour coalition (the working-class and the right-on) would worry Dave at all, in the long-term. It wins him a lot of marginals, might cost him one or two seats directly, and consigns Labour to a 1983-style defeat.
And the more UKIP are in the news the better Remain will do (I say that as a swing voter on the referendum).
Exactly - if you take away 10 percentage points from Lab and give it to UKIP (so Lab 21%, UKIP 23% and everyone else the same), then the Cons lose 2 seats to UKIP but gain 42 from Labour. UKIP gain 12 seats from Labour but still only end up on 15. Meanwhile the Cons end up with a majority of 90
@KennyFarq: "It appears some SNP parliamentary candidates were successfully vetted on the basis of a 30-minute phone interview." https://t.co/RMzFQpT4Ov
I will be astonished if, within the next 12 months, we do not see a third MP being forced to resign the whip. And yes, I have someone specific in mind.
Meanwhile, the SNP’s list of Holyrood candidates is a dripping roast. If some of these people make it into the Scottish parliament they will be nothing but a headache for the party on whose coat-tails they have skidded into a plum job. A couple are front-page news stories waiting to happen.
"I understand that the briefing - to which Corbyn allegedly turned up 15 minutes late -
made crystal clear where ISIL’s command and control centres were in Syria, and how they had directed terror across Europe. Our spooks know who they are, where they are and when they are there. Benn confirmed on the Today programme that the security briefing had made the ISIL threat to the UK ‘very clear’.
Couldn't our spooks tell the French, Russian and American spooks?
No-one, not even Corbyn, doubts that ISIL poses a threat to the UK. The question is how to respond.
If British bombers hit targets based on intelligence provided by the French, and it turned out to be a MSF field hospital, who do you think would get the blame?
"Salmond is probably one of those strange and vain creatures with a mirror on the ceiling above his bed."
Obviously owned my flat on Old Compton St before me. It had a mirror on the ceiling and a hole in the floor revealing the well known peep show "Pussy Galore". Needless to say not being a Lib Dem I got the builders in PDQ
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
We need a proper plan in Syria, one which doesn't involve removing Assad and dismantling the existing state. The plan from yesterday seems to have realised the mistakes from Iraq and Libya, but it doesn't take into account 4 years of Assad being at loggerheads with the so-called "moderate" opposition. The only way to stabilise Syria would be to wipe out all of the Islamist groups including ISIS, the Turkmen, al-Nusra, Islamic Conquest and others, put a few token FSA leaders into the Assad government and tell them to keep quiet while western aid budgets rebuild Syrian infrastructure. I'm not sure that is on the table, however, it has become clear that ISIS are a threat to us and our way of life, we can't sit on the sidelines while other nations defend our interests.
Agree with this just about 100%.
Only thing is, according to eg. Chatham House, there are precious few FSA around these days. Finding "moderate" rebels might have to come from elsewhere.
Hence my "moderate" qualification. This figure of 70,000 moderate rebel fighters is a joke, it's more like 7,000 and even they are allied with some pretty distasteful groups who we would consider as worse than the Assad regime.
Most MPs, like most of the public they represent, are neither anti-war nor pro-war. They certainly have party loyalties that shape their calculations. But what was extremely clear from yesterday’s long debate was that the overwhelming majority were trying to do the right thing.
Doing the right thing is of course extraordinarily difficult in Syria. The situation is spectacularly dangerous and confusing, deeply rooted in ancient animosities and rivalries. The international configurations are volatile and full of risk. And the domestic blowback in all parts of the UK could also be lethal and arbitrary, as the Paris attacks showed. In such a globalised minefield, most MPs inevitably and sensibly step gingerly and uncertainly. Very few, though, think these are good enough reasons for doing nothing.
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
We need a proper plan in Syria, one which doesn't involve removing Assad and dismantling the existing state. The plan from yesterday seems to have realised the mistakes from Iraq and Libya, but it doesn't take into account 4 years of Assad being at loggerheads with the so-called "moderate" opposition. The only way to stabilise Syria would be to wipe out all of the Islamist groups including ISIS, the Turkmen, al-Nusra, Islamic Conquest and others, put a few token FSA leaders into the Assad government and tell them to keep quiet while western aid budgets rebuild Syrian infrastructure. I'm not sure that is on the table, however, it has become clear that ISIS are a threat to us and our way of life, we can't sit on the sidelines while other nations defend our interests.
"Salmond is probably one of those strange and vain creatures with a mirror on the ceiling above his bed."
Obviously owned my flat on Old Compton St before me. It had a mirror on the ceiling and a hole in the floor revealing the well known peep show "Pussy Galore". Needless to say not being a Lib Dem I got the builders in PDQ
Corbyn's spot on in Syria. Between the Turks, the Russians, Assad, Assad militia, Assad's regular army, Iran, Hezbollah, Islamist Anti Assad freedom fighters, the Kurds, Americans and French and of course Isis- all warring factions and driving the country into utter devastation, I don't quite understand what contribution the use of our six bombers would add to this carnage.
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Having spent his whole political life doing his own thing in his 67th year he's not going to change. He doesn't have a clue what being a party leader is all about.
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
We need a proper plan in Syria, one which doesn't involve removing Assad and dismantling the existing state. The plan from yesterday seems to have realised the mistakes from Iraq and Libya, but it doesn't take into account 4 years of Assad being at loggerheads with the so-called "moderate" opposition. The only way to stabilise Syria would be to wipe out all of the Islamist groups including ISIS, the Turkmen, al-Nusra, Islamic Conquest and others, put a few token FSA leaders into the Assad government and tell them to keep quiet while western aid budgets rebuild Syrian infrastructure. I'm not sure that is on the table, however, it has become clear that ISIS are a threat to us and our way of life, we can't sit on the sidelines while other nations defend our interests.
Comments
WHAT THEY DESERVE
Trident.
And/or as I said below, he doesn't want to give a free pass to Jeremy for any loss in Oldham. So he can join in the resignations en masse next Friday...
"Tory Tim!!!"
tim was never as left wing as some think; he supported the Badger, and when pressed, also supported Frank Field..
Don't confuse fanaticism with extremism.
This is different. IS has global ambitions in terms of spreading terror and for us to ignore it, when it is on our streets, would be a dereliction of duty by our government. Let's suppose IS wins. The new caliphate is complete. Do you by any stretch of the imagination believe that will be that?
So will bombing defeat IS? Nope. Will it degrade them? Yes. Will it strongly disincentivise supporters from going to take part? I sincerely hope so.
Hamas?
Hezbollah?
Chavez?
The consistent theme of Corbyn has been "America bad" and "NATO bad" - that is what has informed his choices.
As it is we have democratic governments put there by elections in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Did he vote against the gulf war BTW?
Whether Corbyn goes or the party disintegrates is the question. I'd say it's too close to call. It's a pity because in this instance I prefer his solution to those who want to bomb without a plan that makes sense
I wonder how Labour will surprise us today?
Also wondering what number the Edstone sits at in the most WTF Labour moments, probably out of the top 10 now.
McDonnell supports the IRA
Labour torn over Syria and in civil war
Corbyn cancels visit to safe seat which is a 50/50 hold
Red Ken supports the bombers more than those who were killed
Labour loses more council seats in Scotland
Corbyn stands against his cabinet and his SFSec
Massive number of resignations threatened from ShadCab.
Etc, etc, etc.
.......and that's a "less than optimal day" for the Labour leader?
If that's less than optimal , What the hell does a bad day look like?
Corbyn may be right about the uncertainties of outcomes when a country goes to war. However Cameron may have a very odd definition of moderate when it comes to fighting Assaad.
2020 could be the GE the opposition lost from the morning of after the votes were counted in May 2015. When Ed Miliband stepped down, who would have thought that Labour were more concerned with its own destruction than developing policies to win back power.
There are decent people in the Labour party whom I admire, but Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell & Livingstone are none of them.
The liberals/LDs are a rump ever since the 1920s and only flew high once because of a fluke.
Labour and UKIP have become extremist factions, both looking like fighting over the same declining 'working class' vote.
Ok, the poison under the surface is now clearly visible to all to see.
As for Palmer, I am not convinced he didn't get exactly the sort of party he always wanted.
What is our ultimate objective? How will we know it has been attained? How will our objectives mesh with the objectives of the other involved parties without us getting involved in a shoot out with our "allies" by accident?
When will we realise that to win against Daesh we will have to give them a propaganda victory by putting in ground troops? Have we started up the enlistment drive, cos I haven't seen one yet, or do we bring back the old favourite of the armchair brigade, conscription?
The Reservists not rushing to join the colours to replace all those regular military made redundant, have shown that the policy of passing out recruitment to the private sector has been a complete expensive failure (Private Eye passim). 40,000 increase promised, less than 400 increase over previous existing numbers. (People may be stupid some of the time, but not stupid enough to realise that they could be sent away at a moments notice for long periods of time to areas where other people are trying to do nasty things them, like kill.)
Has Cameron made the case? In my opinion, no. Not yet at least, but I'm sure a dossier of some kind will come to light, soon. My major concern is that he is concerned about his own legacy before he departs no. 10, and wants the title of War Leader (as per Blair, Thatcher and Churchill) added to being the PM who saved the UK.
Don't start what you can't finish.
Da'esh's 5th column is already in Brussels and Birmingham &c.
The internet will turn out to be the means for the destruction of Western civilization.
http://tinyurl.com/nqam9kn
I'm not that keen on Burns's oeuvre, but it's Holbein-esque compared to some of those honkers.
Things Can Only Get Better ....
Chortle ....
Most MPs, like most of the public they represent, are neither anti-war nor pro-war. They certainly have party loyalties that shape their calculations. But what was extremely clear from yesterday’s long debate was that the overwhelming majority were trying to do the right thing.
Doing the right thing is of course extraordinarily difficult in Syria. The situation is spectacularly dangerous and confusing, deeply rooted in ancient animosities and rivalries. The international configurations are volatile and full of risk. And the domestic blowback in all parts of the UK could also be lethal and arbitrary, as the Paris attacks showed. In such a globalised minefield, most MPs inevitably and sensibly step gingerly and uncertainly. Very few, though, think these are good enough reasons for doing nothing.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/27/syria-debate-war-westminster
"Istanbul (AFP) - A court in Istanbul on Thursday charged two journalists from the opposition Cumhuriyet newspaper with spying after they alleged Turkey's secret services had sent arms to Islamist rebels in Syria, Turkish media reported.
Editor-in-chief Can Dundar and Erdem Gul, the paper's Ankara bureau chief, are accused of spying and "divulging state secrets", the reports said. Both men were placed in pre-trial detention."
So Erdogan denies the report last year, yet the trial is now proceeding on the basis that these journalists revealed state secrets.
It is becoming blatantly obvious to anyone that wants to see it that Turkey is arming Al-Nusra and their pet Turkmen and buying black market oil from ISIS. We should suspend Turkey's membership of NATO before they spark another showdown with Russia.
Damned shame.
"I understand that the briefing - to which Corbyn allegedly turned up 15 minutes late -
made crystal clear where ISIL’s command and control centres were in Syria, and how they had directed terror across Europe. Our spooks know who they are, where they are and when they are there. Benn confirmed on the Today programme that the security briefing had made the ISIL threat to the UK ‘very clear’.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/27/the-waugh-zone-november-2_5_n_8660672.html?1448614590&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067
After our input into Libya which resulted in a failed state at Europe's door, a flood of weapons into Africa feeding Boko Haram, illegal poaching and crime, aswell as the creation of a migrant corridor into Italy, Cameron's hardly got a reliable reputation in his foreign policy endeavours.
Your response is half witted. There is no evidence of jingoism all you are doing is making up a feeble excuse. What we have seen is mass murder in Paris amongst other places and regular mad insane choreographed slaughter by ISIS fed by ignorance and bigotey in the name of creating a despotic empire.
There are no tricky questions here, only thickos unable to read the exam paper.
Instead of arresting them for trying to join IS, just fly them over. Let them live with the consequences.
(semi-joking)
"It was the 80s. We can only apologise for these foolish links" said an IRA spokesman.
REMAIN 39%
LEAVE 39%
DK 22%
Plenty of rumours about Labour resignations over Syria but are there any names yet?
Jim Pickard @PickardJE · 54m54 minutes ago
They are courageously talking about it off the record @dungeekin
Which, if I had to look at it every day, would irritate me tremendously.
However, as it is...
1. Active IS fighters - bit of a no brainer
2. The IS support community - for example nobody goes to Raqqa unless they have a basically evil intent. All the 'Jihadi wives', fellow travellers - the lot - are legitimate military targets
3. Saudi Arabia - they fund fundamental Wahhabi Islamism on a huge scale. Yet the west sells tham military kit and pretends they are not what they are. Insane.
4. Qatar - Awash in LNG money and funding and promoting our enemies. Deeply unpleasant and corrupt (not just football!). Yet, as per Saudi Arabia, we shamefully pretend otherwise.
5. Turkey - They protect and support IS. They buy their oil, and thus fund them too. They actively thwart the Kurds in their fight against IS. During the minute's silence for Paris a recent Turkish football crowd at an international game spent the whole minute shouting Allahu Akbar at the top of their voices. We should see them for what they are too. Muslims whose heart is not with us. Or their money. Or their army. WTF are they doing in NATO?
So...I fear we'll not man up to the job we actually face against an unrelenting, un-negotiable-with, unfeeling, medieval monster. Let's smash the monster - not just its outer tentacles.
No-one, not even Corbyn, doubts that ISIL poses a threat to the UK. The question is how to respond.
Either the UK contributes militarily to the efforts to defeat ISIS in Syria or we rely on others to take the full burden whilst our citizens are beheaded in the middle east or murdered in overseas tourist attractions like Tunisia and potentially face a Paris like outrage in the UK.
In my view the do nothing situation in Syria is the worst of several extremely unenviable prospects.
Only thing is, according to eg. Chatham House, there are precious few FSA around these days. Finding "moderate" rebels might have to come from elsewhere.
I don't see why UKIP splitting the increasingly untenable Labour coalition (the working-class and the right-on) would worry Dave at all, in the long-term. It wins him a lot of marginals, might cost him one or two seats directly, and consigns Labour to a 1983-style defeat.
And the more UKIP are in the news the better Remain will do (I say that as a swing voter on the referendum).
Jean Yves Le-Drain French Minister of Defence
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/26/britain-france-fight-isis
The Middle East is a mile away from democracy, we need brutal secular(ish) strongmen in place. It's either them or the terrorists.
@christopherhope: So @DouglasCarswell is a "late 19th century political reformer", according to @Nigel_Farage on @LBC
@DouglasCarswell: @christopherhope I won in 2015. And 2014. And 2010 and 05.
@KennyFarq: SNP internal discipline is being threatened by activists' anger over candidate vetting. My column in @thetimes today https://t.co/HeQy0GC2t7
Interesting Reaper video too http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/12017887/david-cameron-syria-air-strikes-plan-live.html#update-20151126-1822
https://twitter.com/KerryMP/status/670156870426996736
"Salmond is probably one of those strange and vain creatures with a mirror on the ceiling above his bed."
Obviously owned my flat on Old Compton St before me. It had a mirror on the ceiling and a hole in the floor revealing the well known peep show "Pussy Galore". Needless to say not being a Lib Dem I got the builders in PDQ
@KerryMP: Shouldn't say fishermen but "fishers" sounds wrong as a gender neutral alternative?
Cough ....
@campbellclaret: If I did politics the Ken Livingstone way I might be tempted to do a bit of mental illness abuse this morning. But I don't so I won't
"Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (a.k.a. Eastern Turkistan Islamic Party; a.k.a. ETIM; a.k.a. ETIP)"