Syria

Bats

Senior Retro Guru
David Cameron: Jeremy Corbyn is a threat to national security.
David Cameron: [Goes to war]
 
Re:

smoke and mirrors ,dont like arguing about politics .
but seems funny to me no one out on the streets wanted this yet they go and do it.
dave really has disapointed me this time :roll:

on a side note have to say hillary benns speech was top notch.
 
Re:

Think its ridiculous that he had to resort to pathetic name calling if his case for the bombing was so strong. Lets hope the government are been as quick to come up with their master plan for resolving the situation and an exit plan as they were to drop the first bomb after the vote. Hope I'm wrong but this just feels like repeating the same mistakes.
 
they were going to win the argument and the name calling was just daft.

Whether its a solution is the real question, and on its own it isn't. If they work together with international allies they could resolve this but its going to be a long haul and require many more actions. If that's worth doing is anybody's guess at this stage. To me the international communities need to do something not because of the terror attacks but because of the millions of refugees. I am often disgusted that we leave places like Rwanda to commit genocide yet we intervene here because of oil. It shouldn't be about oil but about people.
 
I don't like the lack of end plan, this is what fucked up Iraq and Libya. What Cameron said was a disgrace and not worthy of a Prime Minister, i don't agree completely with Corbyn's politics but he seems to be a more genuine person; probably not good for a politician.
 
No plan, but a pattern.

1) topple a government that doesn't take orders from us or washington
2) farm out contracts for the "rebuilding" to your mates
3) oh well the rebuilding went tits up but at least your mates got paid
4) failed to put in a puppet government, but at least the old one's not around to be a threat. declare mission accomplished, exit through back door

They'll make pleasant sounding noises about fighting ISIS but it's not hard to see what they really mean when they ask who's going to rule syria after they win. They're assuming Assad won't be there any more, I wonder why they might do that?

Pretty arrogant imperial worldview - We get to decide what governments other countries can have, and they don't.
 
Re:

Salmonds claim that Hilary's father would be turning in his grave was uncalled for. It shows Salmonds ignorance as well as rudeness, even more so as Tony was cremated.
 
Re:

Something needs to be done. This isn't that something.

Remember this is being done to protect our citizens.

Cut off one head, and another 10 will grow back. Maybe 3 will get back here to the U.K. It only takes 1 to slip through the net.
Speculation of course, but this course of action makes us more prone to being a target to those that are already on the edge of being 'radicalized', being tipped over the edge and committing an evil act against innocent U.K. citizens, the majority of whom don't support this course of action.

And as for the 'terrorist sympathizer' quote, it's worryingly similar to one made be Joseph Goebbels. Trying to find it now.
 
Re: Re:

highlandsflyer":6pitrb9u said:
The descendants of Benn have to realise he is something larger than their precious feelings. What he would think is relevant to the debate, as his views as stated are relevant to most issues.

I find nothing remotely distasteful in pointing out he would be turning in his grave at his son's warmongering speech.

You may not because clearly you are a Salmond supporter but if the roles were reversed, I doubt Hilary Benn would use the same tactics and use Mr Salmonds Dead mother for political point scoring even less so given Tony only died last year.

Hilary would be able to get his difference of opinion across without using someone with a different opinions dead relatives to do so.

In matters of debate, Salmond is a knuckle dragging thug who's only ability to be 1st class is the train ticket he gets tax payers to pay for.
 
Re: Re:

Pointing out that his father would be ashamed of him is entirely legitimate. Because it's entirely true.

highlandsflyer":xaw9nzsm said:
And f... Russia! They really haven't the technology to have a real scrap with NATO, so let's call their bluff.

NATO spent $400 billion on a plane so advanced it doesn't work. The most powerful member country issues its soldiers with guns that can barely cycle, but they were too proud to admit it was crap, so they quietly added an unjam button. There were so many vested interests in their APC project that it was changed into a tank by accident, so they had to keep the vehicle it was replacing around. At one point they wasted several billion dollars on the technologically impossible goal of building orbital death lasers. These are just a few examples.

They have lost wars to countries which fought them using Russian guns and hand-me-down russian cropdusters. This isn't a game of top trumps they're particularly equipped to win.
 
Back
Top