Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Cameron is having a one day debate and vote on Syria on Wednesday. Corbyn wanted it to be two days. Funny that as the Oldham by election is on Thursday and the headlines will be Corbyn loses vote on Syria. That will be nice to read on the way to the polling booths.

Euhhh....you don't think that those madmen in Syria won't slightly have guessed that those Brits in magnificent flying machines are coming....if they haven't : then they've been doing an ostrich act in the desert.....you know...they are probably on the orient express as we speak coming over to Blighty straight away whilst we prepare to bomb empty bunks in dusty aqua town...if they ever find another nickname for the house of commons it won't be speedy gonzales....

Syria airstrikes: Three reasons why Labour's free vote on Syria is flawed

Telegraph's Asa Bennett analyses how Jeremy Corbyn's anti-war position has compromised both Labour and his own leadership


Jeremy Corbyn has sought to defuse tensions in the row over what position Labour takes on bombing Isil in Syria by offering shadow cabinet ministers a free vote, however here are three reasons it will end in tears.


Firstly, he has put noses out of joint after initially repeatedly refusing to rule out giving MPs a free vote, with Diane Abbott saying on Radio 4 Today that "a party of government has to have a position on peace and war".



His insistence on making clear that Labour is an anti-war party, despite allowing his top team to vote as they wish, may seem a relative sop.


Secondly, despite seeming to make peace with MPs on a matter of war, Jeremy Corbyn is still trying to pick a fight by allowing pro-intervention shadow ministers to express their views, but subtly putting them off from doing so by making a big fuss about how "anti-war" Labour is under his leadership.

Any shadow ministers who do thus risk being ostracised in his "anti-war" party and pilloried by Corbynite activists. His plea to David Cameron for a two day debate on Syria would seem like a simple ploy for more time to twist his own MPs arms.



Thirdly, backing down on an issue as crucial as this shows Jeremy Corbyn's weakness, as he has angered anti-war activists by failing to force Labour MPs to oppose action, while moderates rankle at the cack-handed attempt to force them to follow his stance.

Some of his top team will undoubtedly now think, if the lifelong pacifist can cave in on an issue of war and peace, what else can he fold over?

syria debate
whatever decision parliament reaches, i am more than happy to accept it
this may not be perfect democracy - you'ld need to go back to ancient athens and the agora for that! - but it's a very good second best

will it be a truly free vote?
a cautious yes, though some MPs will undoubtedly be pressured by various parties inside and particularly, those threatening from outside ..... can't be helped

is there a tenable argument against further bombing?
of course there is, but that should be logical and thoughtful ..... and the same applies to other side of the argument

=============

some of the rabid and derisive comment on this BB is just party-political prejudice

What will the bombing achieve?

over a week ago I posted that my info said turkey was buying oil from isil
well its now out . turkey not only buys the stolen oil it is providing weapons to isil
they have for the last 4 years .

turkey should be brought to book

the labour party was the backbone of the working classes now it is their enemy
corbyn has destroyed the party of the people .

he has given the CONSERVATIVES A FREE PASSAGE FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS

Tanks.

The labour party stopped being for the working man long before Corbyn.

max - from very little that i know (and i don't think anyone here is much better informed), targeted bombing linked to boots on the ground that'll almost certainly be primarily the russkies, will do for starters

one of the major problems and indeed oddities relates to the ultimate destiny of assad and his regime and what happens, or at least is planned to happen once he is deposed ..... and that is something to which we'll never be privy, for very obvious reasons

================

if you have the time and inclination to listen to the whole debate, you'll certainly be better informed than me, and thus your own preference more easily made

Afghanistan,

Russia first.

American,

Britain,

And


But at least boots on the ground/

-=-=-=-=

How much civilian blood or civilians killed to make heroes.

I would like to see the plans of confrontation and then withdrawal and a phantasy view of the result.

-=-==

But those who don't mind a drop of somebody else's blood being spilt.

Up and at em, Good show!


It is the Cameron Show!

How many c

Why don't they have ID checks on the street ? in the UK....probably loads of these undesirables already here....can't help but think this vote thing is just to satisfy peoples egos...good talk about the RAF(they always get all the credit even though other forces have done even more)....brings in more votes.........it's an invasion force that's wanted out there....round up all those muslim extremists and execute them...politicians only do what will get them the most votes....bombing unless it's incredibly precise will just fuel hatred and the terrorists will plan more massacres in europe and elsewhere...

cynic.

I am by no means a pacifist, but going to war in a half baked manner is no answer.

Sending in the warplanes will make for good video, and little else.

Aircraft can neither take nor hold ground, you have to have troops to do that...mission creep is written all over this action, where will it end?


Where is the plan?

RF by doing nothing like we have and most have for the last 5 years is the problem get in their and wipe the scum out they are not soldiers just cowards in numbers get them on their own and they cry

from a old soldier get us in their and show them a army they will run and are just cowards

doing nothing is a non argument action and big action must be taken
take no prisoners kill them all

RF.

Like the west treated the colonies in the old days.

The problem is that "nations" have "long memories". Often the "memories" are "fictitious" but the "leaders (politicians)" utilise to work for their own aims.

Repeating, the "teaching" lends "suppression" for a while ant then a release of the "aberrant actions" once again.

Look at the Serbian, Croatian, Slovenian, Bosnian war, from 1991 - 2008 and the consequences still ongoing Also, look at the aftermath of that "justified war".

uuummumumum

Osborne as set aside £1billion for this year for armed involvement!

There must be better uses of that money than murdering civilians and destroying and vandalising cities.

UmUM

There is no plan...except a general public vote puller...that's what it looks like...

contrary to what some would promote here, there is no absolute right or wrong vote, but it helps if one is in command of as much FACT as possible, always accepting that there is inevitably, and quite rightly, a great deal of discussion and planning that goes on behind the scenes

as i wrote earlier ......
my gut feel has been well-posted, but i have neither the time nor the inclination to listen to the debate - it should be very interesting and thought-provoking or at least i hope so
i am therefore very happy to accept whatever line parliament decides

I like easy conversions.

One way, or another, lean with the wind, be pragmatic, etc..

Anyway, it wasn't my fault, that is what we pay politicians for!

Not so sure it's a good idea to discuss openly any plans this coalition has publicly as regards tactics , these terrorist's have enough info at their disposal . I think there's too much openly talked about personally .

Sounds as if you like the Masons' idea of operating behind closed doors.

The public shouldn't know, why or what we are doing or going to do?

A bit like Germany 1930s.

No for f*cks sake are you telling me you tell the enemy what your going to do on the battlefield .