Today's HOC Vote

Hobbit said:
Taking a wee step back. You probably posted up the most erudite and thoughful opinion in the run up to the vote, it wouldn't have been out of place in the floor of the House, and I genuinely appreciated and respected it for the passion and intelligence it contained. Much of it I genuinely couldn't disagree with. It is those of similar opinion that are most desparately needed if only to act as a brake to those who would, probably, resort to the fire and forget weaponary available.

But why oh why do you treat so many people with the opposite view so disdainfully? When the debate becomes a personal argument, with insults like "ignorant" etc, it stops been one of persuasion and just becomes two cats spitting across the fence at each other.

Why not try a reasoned discussion rather than resorting to being so insulting? Your intelligence is so obvious, yet so much diluted by the langauge you resort to. We need your reasoned argument, and that of like minded people, but you do the argument a disservice by taking it into the gutter.
Click to expand...

Hobbit, a lot of people here use emotion and cliche rather than rational argument. It is very hard to balance the two, and then some people switch to ad hominem attacks and insults, like the last guy (now on ignore) and I will repay them in kind.

It is a pity that some of the pro-bombing side can't see that those against bombing are not just sitting around relaxed about the possibility of increased terror attacks in the UK and Europe or cool with IS doing their thing. Quite the contrary, it is critical not to replace a bad thing with a worse one.

The debate should be about how to put a durable strategy in place to deal with IS and many think the bombing will just inflame it and not get at the root cause at all. You are entitled to disagree with that, but accusations that we will only wake up when bombs go off nearby do not help. I have already lived in a place where bombs went off near me so I don't need lectures about that.
 
Imurg said:
Where are IS getting their funds from?
Oil sales? I've heard/read as much.
Who's buying it? Why are they being allowed to?
How are they paying for it? Does IS have a huge cave stuffed with millions of dollars(or whatever currency)?
I doubt it, so they must have bank accounts.
Can these be frozen? If not, why not? If they can, why haven't they been..?

Cut the funds - it has to be the starting point doesn't it?
The International Community needs to , collectively, starve IS of funds.
Now.
Click to expand...

In short, Saudi. That is why their meaningful involvement is critical and without it, other strategies will fail.
 
Imurg said:
Where are IS getting their funds from?
Oil sales? I've heard/read as much.
Who's buying it? Why are they being allowed to?
How are they paying for it? Does IS have a huge cave stuffed with millions of dollars(or whatever currency)?
I doubt it, so they must have bank accounts.
Can these be frozen? If not, why not? If they can, why haven't they been..?

Cut the funds - it has to be the starting point doesn't it?
The International Community needs to , collectively, starve IS of funds.
Now.
Click to expand...

Turkey are supposedly buying the oil that helps fund them
 
Ethan said:
Hobbit, a lot of people here use emotion and cliche rather than rational argument. It is very hard to balance the two, and then some people switch to ad hominem attacks and insults, like the last guy (now on ignore) and I will repay them in kind.

It is a pity that some of the pro-bombing side can't see that those against bombing are not just sitting around relaxed about the possibility of increased terror attacks in the UK and Europe or cool with IS doing their thing. Quite the contrary, it is critical not to replace a bad thing with a worse one.

The debate should be about how to put a durable strategy in place to deal with IS and many think the bombing will just inflame it and not get at the root cause at all. You are entitled to disagree with that, but accusations that we will only wake up when bombs go off nearby do not help. I have already lived in a place where bombs went off near me so I don't need lectures about that.
Click to expand...

Don't and can't disagree with the above. Personally, I think we need a bit of everything. A limited bombing campaign with very carefully chosen targets, e.g. an oil refinery is highly unlikely to be situated between a school and a hospital, and is more than likely well out of a town. And an assault on their propaganda and funding. A propaganda campaign of our own to educate those that might turn to IS, both over there and here.

I agree with many of your posts that clearly state what else are we doing, and what is the exit strategy?

But I still support the need to physically attack IS from the air and, ultimately, from the ground. The alternative is to do... what? Do I sleep well thinking of what is being done in my name, or that our armed services are being put in harm's way? Absolutely not. But the thought of some of the things that IS have done and will continue to do if they carry on unhindered.

Bombing isn't right, but sadly it isn't wrong either.
 
That sums it up very well Brian

It's not about revenge for Paris , it's not about being bloodthirsty and killing for the sake of it - it's what I think is needed right now - alongside other measures to help combat ISIS

Not one single person wants to drop bombs onto people but right now I think it's necessary
 
Imurg said:
Where are IS getting their funds from?
Oil sales? I've heard/read as much.
Who's buying it? Why are they being allowed to?
How are they paying for it? Does IS have a huge cave stuffed with millions of dollars(or whatever currency)?
I doubt it, so they must have bank accounts.
Can these be frozen? If not, why not? If they can, why haven't they been..?

Cut the funds - it has to be the starting point doesn't it?
The International Community needs to , collectively, starve IS of funds.
Now.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly Ian. As you say, surely in this day and age the money supply can be cut off unless they do have lorry loads of cash which I somehow doubt.
 
They literally do have lorry loads of cash. They stole ~ $500m in cash and gold bullion from banks in Mosul last year. And that's just one incident amongst many.
 
Jimaroid said:
They literally do have lorry loads of cash. They stole ~ $500m in cash and gold bullion from banks in Mosul last year. And that's just one incident amongst many.
Click to expand...

Plus millions of pounds worth of precious jewels - diamonds especially
 
Ethan said:
Hobbit, a lot of people here use emotion and cliche rather than rational argument. It is very hard to balance the two, and then some people switch to ad hominem attacks and insults, like the last guy (now on ignore) and I will repay them in kind.

It is a pity that some of the pro-bombing side can't see that those against bombing are not just sitting around relaxed about the possibility of increased terror attacks in the UK and Europe or cool with IS doing their thing. Quite the contrary, it is critical not to replace a bad thing with a worse one.

The debate should be about how to put a durable strategy in place to deal with IS and many think the bombing will just inflame it and not get at the root cause at all. You are entitled to disagree with that, but accusations that we will only wake up when bombs go off nearby do not help. I have already lived in a place where bombs went off near me so I don't need lectures about that.
Click to expand...

Hmm, Corbyn really showed in his true colours in the past, did'nt he, has he changed that much ?

1.jpg
 
Ethan said:
As you know, at the exact same time as Corbyn and Livingstone were talking to Sinn Fein, Thatcher's officials were doing the exact same thing. Except they were doing it in secret. Is there a moral difference?
Click to expand...

Not a great deal of difference I agree. However, unlike Corbyn, there are no reports of Thatcher's officials observing a minutes silence for members of the IRA killed by British forces.
 
The thread has been very good in regards informative debate - let's please not start the tit for tat about each leader - the Corbyn thread is already full of that
 
ColchesterFC said:
Are you really going to try to defend Corbyn's links to the IRA?
Click to expand...

Corbin has no more links to the IRA than most recent Governments. He wanted to help the peace process and wanted to get the confidence of Sinn Fein i order to bring influence to bear. As DFT has pointed out, this sort of thing is part of the process.

Corbyn has got into trouble about his pacifist views, nukes, Syria etc. It should be obvious that did not support the IRA and you may or may not like his methods for trying to help, but you can't seriously question the intent. He has a much better track record in supporting peace and negotiation than any recent Prime Minister.
 
I do hope that the Government, now they have the go ahead for air strikes, are also now challenging Turkey and Saudi Arabia over their role in this.
Or will Mr. Cameron find that more unsettling than a military campaign?
 
Ethan said:
Corbin has no more links to the IRA than most recent Governments. He wanted to help the peace process and wanted to get the confidence of Sinn Fein i order to bring influence to bear. As DFT has pointed out, this sort of thing is part of the process.

Corbyn has got into trouble about his pacifist views, nukes, Syria etc. It should be obvious that did not support the IRA and you may or may not like his methods for trying to help, but you can't seriously question the intent. He has a much better track record in supporting peace and negotiation than any recent Prime Minister.
Click to expand...

If he has no more links than most recent governments perhaps you can tell me which recent governments have attended IRA fund raising events and stood in silence to remember dead IRA terrorists then?

And why do you get to decide what I can or can't question about him? I will question whatever I want to whether you like it or not. In my view Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser along with Ken Livingstone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top