Jeremy Corbyn

[Ethan]

Think its fairly safe to assume the 'solution' Ken has been pedalling over the last few days will be similar/same to Jezza's views...

Corbin doesn't advocate walking away. He advocates not causing mass civilian causalities in Raqqa. His plan is to achieve a political settlement in Syria by cutting off Isis funding, oil trading and weapons supply. Do you disagree that would be an effective thing to do?

 

[ColchesterFC]

Corbin doesn't advocate walking away. He advocates not causing mass civilian causalities in Raqqa. His plan is to achieve a political settlement in Syria by cutting off Isis funding, oil trading and weapons supply. Do you disagree that would be an effective thing to do?

I'm not sure that IS would accept any kind of political settlement. What is the plan after cutting off the funding, oil trading and weapons supply? These people aren't suddenly going to change their minds and become reasonable human beings.

 

[Ethan]

I'm not sure that IS would accept any kind of political settlement. What is the plan after cutting off the funding, oil trading and weapons supply? These people aren't suddenly going to change their minds and become reasonable human beings.

They will be a bit easier to deal with when their funding and supplies are cut off. They will never be reasonable people, but if the plan is to bomb all unreasonable people .....

 

[MegaSteve]

Corbin doesn't advocate walking away. He advocates not causing mass civilian causalities in Raqqa. His plan is to achieve a political settlement in Syria by cutting off Isis funding, oil trading and weapons supply. Do you disagree that would be an effective thing to do?

Neither has Ken been advocating 'walking away'... Nobody should really be comfortable with potentially causing mass civilian casualties as part of an attempt at seeking a solution...

Sitting here, in comfortable suburbia, I have no real idea of what would be the best way of achieving peace... Largely because who can really be sure of what we see/hear in the media is actually fact or just propaganda...

 

[ColchesterFC]

They will be a bit easier to deal with when their funding and supplies are cut off. They will never be reasonable people, but if the plan is to bomb all unreasonable people .....

So how do we deal with them once the funding and supplies have been cut off?

And we aren't bombing them because they are unreasonable, we're bombing them to try to stop them committing mass murder against anyone that doesn't share their warped view of the world.

 

[Ethan]

So how do we deal with them once the funding and supplies have been cut off?

And we aren't bombing them because they are unreasonable, we're bombing them to try to stop them committing mass murder against anyone that doesn't share their warped view of the world.

I would refer you to the post to which I replied earlier.

 

[Old Skier]

So how do we deal with them once the funding and supplies have been cut off.

Not sure how it's going to be possible to go for all of their funding. Terrorist will revert to type when required.

IRA/Sinn Fein got most of their funding through criminal acts including intimidation, robbery, and drug sales along with funding from its supporters in America, IS have found a way of distributing oil but a way has been found to limit this, oh wait it requires bombing, best not do that. And like the IRA there will be those only to willing to chuck money at them.

 

[ColchesterFC]

I would refer you to the post to which I replied earlier.

Which post is that then? The question hasn't been asked or answered before as you've only just brought up cutting off funding etc.

What do we do after the funding and supplies have been cut off? What is the next step in the process of dealing with IS after that has been done?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Corbin doesn't advocate walking away. He advocates not causing mass civilian causalities in Raqqa. His plan is to achieve a political settlement in Syria by cutting off Isis funding, oil trading and weapons supply. Do you disagree that would be an effective thing to do?

Do you not think all these options have been discussed ?

ISIS are interested in political settlements - it's not a political war they are fighting - they won't stop until the Western world is suffering every day and then they will keep going. These guys won't sit around a campfire with western leaders having a cuddle and a chat - they want them all to die a very horrible death

You can't cut of their funding - they will always find a way to get their weapons to kill their targets - it's time for us to stand up to them and do our bit to fight people who don't respect other people's right to live peacefully.

 

[Ethan]

Which post is that then? The question hasn't been asked or answered before as you've only just brought up cutting off funding etc.

What do we do after the funding and supplies have been cut off? What is the next step in the process of dealing with IS after that has been done?

If I must spell it out for you, which it seems i must, you said:

"These people aren't suddenly going to change their minds and become reasonable human beings."

So I said:

"They will never be reasonable people, but if the plan is to bomb all unreasonable people ....."

So you said:

"And we aren't bombing them because they are unreasonable, we're bombing them to try to stop them committing mass murder against anyone that doesn't share their warped view of the world."

So I said:

"I would refer you to the post to which I replied earlier."

........

OK?

 

[Ethan]

Do you not think all these options have been discussed ?

ISIS are interested in political settlements - it's not a political war they are fighting - they won't stop until the Western world is suffering every day and then they will keep going. These guys won't sit around a campfire with western leaders having a cuddle and a chat - they want them all to die a very horrible death

You can't cut of their funding - they will always find a way to get their weapons to kill their targets - it's time for us to stand up to them and do our bit to fight people who don't respect other people's right to live peacefully.

As I said before, few people care if IS people are evaporated in a drive strike. It is the risk that others, already victims, will also be killed, and that it may not be possible to actually execute, so to speak, the objectives. If you remember, Iraq2 was expected to be a short campaign, and it was, but that unleashed a whole tsunami of disaster throughout the region. It also killed more civilians than Saddam had killed. Corbin and others are right to be concerned the same will happen again, and this one has the complication of Assad and the various groups, some of which are rather dodgy opposing him, will both be strengthened.

The US, UK and European allies should pressure Saudi and Jordan to lead this fight. If the west goes in, it only encourages others to believe what IS are saying, that this is a Christian crusade against Islam and the fight must be taken to the west.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/29/raqqa-exiles-bashar-al-assad-isis-bombing?CMP=fb_gu

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-war-terror-defeat-muslim-world-equal-partner

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...l-in-Syria-former-military-chief-signals.html

 

[Deleted member 15344]

As I said before, few people care if IS people are evaporated in a drive strike. It is the risk that others, already victims, will also be killed, and that it may not be possible to actually execute, so to speak, the objectives. If you remember, Iraq2 was expected to be a short campaign, and it was, but that unleashed a whole tsunami of disaster throughout the region. It also killed more civilians than Saddam had killed. Corbin and others are right to be concerned the same will happen again, and this one has the complication of Assad and the various groups, some of which are rather dodgy opposing him, will both be strengthened.

The US, UK and European allies should pressure Saudi and Jordan to lead this fight. If the west goes in, it only encourages others to believe what IS are saying, that this is a Christian crusade against Islam and the fight must be taken to the west.

Well we can just sit back and let them continue attacking the west then murdering innocent victims as they go on their merry way of destruction.

I'm not talking drone strikes im talking precision bombing at specific targets.

IS don't care about risks , they just want to inflict suffering and we need to stand up to them - Corbyn can go over and lead the peace talks - he can then become the next British citizen to lose their head.

Corbyn and all the other pacifists have failed to come up with an alternative workable solution to ISIS - until it's time for force to used

 

[Ethan]

Well we can just sit back and let them continue attacking the west then murdering innocent victims as they go on their merry way of destruction.

I'm not talking drone strikes im talking precision bombing at specific targets.

IS don't care about risks , they just want to inflict suffering and we need to stand up to them - Corbyn can go over and lead the peace talks - he can then become the next British citizen to lose their head.

Corbyn and all the other pacifists have failed to come up with an alternative workable solution to ISIS - until it's time for force to used

People who oppose this aren't necessarily pacifists. They are just not stupid gung-ho Rambos.

If you are so smart and knowledgeable about military strategy and capability, tell me why the Telegraph article below is wrong.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...l-in-Syria-former-military-chief-signals.html

 

[Deleted member 15344]

People who oppose this aren't necessarily pacifists. They are just not stupid gung-ho Rambos.

If you are so smart and knowledgeable about military strategy and capability, tell me why the Telegraph article below is wrong.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...l-in-Syria-former-military-chief-signals.html

And people who would like more forcable action aren't "stupid gung ho Rambos" as you so eloquently put it

Still waiting for a workable alternative action to UK getting involved in military action and helping in the fight against ISIS

And the U.K. Military has this nasty habit of getting the job done regardless of what people think about their capabilities and will ensure there is enough A/C capable of delivering effective presicion targeted bombing - as they have always done. The UK military is good like that - quality over quantity

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Apologies to Hobbit😃
Why are people on opposite sides labelled as Pacifists and Rambo gunho's, actually both want the same outcome, IS wiped off the face of this earth.
Took the time out to listen to Corbyn this morning and was actually a little impressed, especially with the question he was asking Cameron to explain and that is, how will the bombing of Syria make us safer in the UK?
In the long term it would, I've no doubt, in the short term, I genuinely believe it could increase the risk. I don't have the answer, none of us do, and I take points from a few on here that we need a mix of strategy.
Yes I think we should help in the bombing of IS Targets in Syria, we need to put immense pressure on Saudi and other Middle East powers to step up and thirdly we need to increase security both from a visible perspective and covert in the UK, also putting a lot of effort in getting all religions and faiths to clme together.

 

[ColchesterFC]

If I must spell it out for you, which it seems i must, you said:

"These people aren't suddenly going to change their minds and become reasonable human beings."

So I said:

"They will never be reasonable people, but if the plan is to bomb all unreasonable people ....."

So you said:

"And we aren't bombing them because they are unreasonable, we're bombing them to try to stop them committing mass murder against anyone that doesn't share their warped view of the world."

So I said:

"I would refer you to the post to which I replied earlier."

........

OK?

So you don't have an answer to the question then? Just copying and pasting previous comments isn't spelling anything out. It's just a petty attempt at being condescending. You have simply refused to answer the question I asked you.

So I'll try once more.....

After we have cut of the funding and supplies as you suggested what should we do then?

 

[Ethan]

And people who would like more forcable action aren't "stupid gung ho Rambos" as you so eloquently put it

Still waiting for a workable alternative action to UK getting involved in military action and helping in the fight against ISIS

And the U.K. Military has this nasty habit of getting the job done regardless of what people think about their capabilities and will ensure there is enough A/C capable of delivering effective presicion targeted bombing - as they have always done. The UK military is good like that - quality over quantity

OK, so senior military say they don't have the air capability and will need ground troops, but a guy on a golf forum disagrees. OK, time to attack!

 

[Ethan]

So you don't have an answer to the question then? Just copying and pasting previous comments isn't spelling anything out. It's just a petty attempt at being condescending. You have simply refused to answer the question I asked you.

So I'll try once more.....

After we have cut of the funding and supplies as you suggested what should we do then?

I will try to answer it once again, since it is not getting through the fog of war obscuring your vision and bloodlust.

This has to be sorted out by local regional actors, not the west. When it becomes sufficiently critical, Saudi and Jordan will get involved. Israel may do so too, although that would be much less welcome. We need to persuade them to bring that schedule forward.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I will try to answer it once again, since it is not getting through the fog of war obscuring your vision and bloodlust.

This has to be sorted out by local regional actors, not the west. When it becomes sufficiently critical, Saudi and Jordan will get involved. Israel may do so too, although that would be much less welcome. We need to persuade them to bring that schedule forward.

I agree they should, what do we do until it becomes sufficiently critical though, that's the immediate problem as IS are here and now.

 

[ColchesterFC]

Love the fact that anyone that disagrees with you has bloodlust or is a gung ho Rambo. I was just trying to have a debate and look at alternatives.

Why would Saudi and Jordan get involved? What do you believe would be the trigger event for them to take action?

For the record I am not yet convinced of the benefits of bombing IS targets in Syria but do try to listen to both sides of the argument before forming an opinion.