Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[mrsblue]

I disagree. Yes the supply of fanatics is important, but whereas Al Qaeda was geographically not tied down to any one place - ISIS are. They yearn for stability and a place of influence. Decimate that area and they will dissipate.

ps its financial strength mainly comes from taxing/punishing the locals - so again, capture the area, they lose the economic benefits.

They sell oil to Turkey amongst others!

 

[londonblue]

I mentioned three specific examples of recent interventions which haven't worked out.It's completely specious to mention others that did.

Why? Because it doesn't fit your agenda? As you say, those are examples of where it did work. So I'm glad you accept that intervention can work.

 

[londonblue]

60 million died in WWII. The extent to which it can be considered a success has to be qualified somewhat.

Agreed, but in terms of civilian deaths a whole load more would have died had the UK not been so bold as to oppose the nazis.

 

[mrsblue]

ISIS's strength is its Caliphate. Make inroads into that area and you're winning the battle. I never said just bombing, but as the Caliphate is part of its ideology, bombing makes sense as part of an overall strategy. Of course, the strategy has to include welcoming immigrants into our countries as well.

Russia/US/Afghanistan as part of proxy wars in the Cold War is a different kettle of fish as you should know.

No of course not, but you sign up for the army and it's a risk of the job in any war.

Of course, but sometimes it's not as simple as that. Some on this list are giving us information back- I reckon Hooky was a double agent for the MI5.

When America declared Bin Laden was their most wanted claiming he masterminded 9/11(even though Bin Laden denied involvement)they the Americans galvanised every extremist.Bush steamed into Iraq helping one tribe whilst royally hacking off the other side.America then crept into Pakistan and "murdered" Bin Laden which again had the extremists baying for blood.

Bin Laden once a friend of the West,buried at sea,yeah right!

Bush and Blair are the reasons why the ME is so unstable IMO .

 

[mrsblue]

The question was about intervention with certain regimes not how to deal with terrorists. The two missions are completely different. I am not against killing the likes of Jihadi John with a drone.

We invaded Iraq because a man in a cave in Afghanistan with a cell phone and a computer used some Saudis to attack the Pentagon with a commercial airliner. And nobody saw it coming (yeah Jimmy Hill).

Just to sex it up a bit we lied and said Saddam has lots of weapons of mass destruction that he intends to use on the west. After lots of death to Iraqi women and children and plenty of old tribal wounds opened up we were in a situation where we had no exit strategy. As we had found none of these chemical weapons or even any terrorists that had anything to do with 9/11, our political masters decided that the war had all been for regime change.

Even last year we couldn't decide whether to bomb or support the Syrian rebels fighting Assad. We have proved beyond any reasonable doubt that we don't have a clue when it comes to the Middle East. When we have stepped in we have only made things a lot worse and far more people have died and will continue to do so.

One thing is certain though if you create a lawless un governed country then the terrorists will flourish. We certainly have to be stricter with who we let into Europe, who leaves Britain and who we allow to walk the streets. As has proved in Paris these people were known to authorities.

South Korea has been bombed by the North

Sorry Riggers but several people saw the "airliner" closing in on the Pentacon ,Radar operater asked Cheney "are the orders still the same"....Cheney replied "yes",Another high ranking official testified he witnessed this yet his statement was omitted from the enquiry.

85 cameras witnessed the "airliner" yet the world has only ever seen one grainy image.

The official line is the jet was flying at 2 feet when it struck the Pentacon travelling at 530mph !,How the hell did the "pilot" manage his wonderful aeroplane manoeuvres even though he failed his flying test,even more remarkable was the pilot flew the jet into the only part of the Pentacon which had been recently reinforced and where suddenly the 2 trillion defence budget black hole was "wiped out".Another incredible event was this jet beat science,firstly it had zero jet wake,nobody reported any problems from the highway,the Pentacon lawn was undamaged,amazing.Secondly the jet amazingly managed to change size becoming far smaller than its actual size.

But they said they did it,so it must be true?

 

[rigsby]

It's as if you just want to disagree with me but the reason changes with every post!

The dictatorship overthrow is hyperthetical and in the hypothesis other nations would be involved so scrapping the NHS wouldn't be part of my grand pretend plan.

If you are at all interested in politics I posted up Compo's stance word for word so if you want to scroll back a bit it's there to be seen. Or if not interested then....don't

Back to your old politicians trick....If you can't back up your argument go personal

So you agree with the Corbyn stance do you?

Or answer a question with a question

 

[Swiss Tony]

Your anti-Labour,not to mention anti-Jeremy Corbyn hysteria, is truly remarkable.

And your anti-tory not to mention anti-Cameron hysteria isn't remarkable? you hypocrite tangers.:stunned:

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Your anti-Labour,not to mention anti-Jeremy Corbyn hysteria, is truly remarkable.

1. It's a thread about Jeremy Corbyn - the article I posted is about - wait for it - Jeremy Corbyn
2. As already mentioned by Swiss Tony I think, you're a hypocrite. Mind you I think most if not all on these boards are already aware of this.
3. The anti Jeremy Corbyn stuff is in full flow mostly from the PLP.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

When America declared Bin Laden was their most wanted claiming he masterminded 9/11(even though Bin Laden denied involvement)they the Americans galvanised every extremist.Bush steamed into Iraq helping one tribe whilst royally hacking off the other side.America then crept into Pakistan and "murdered" Bin Laden which again had the extremists baying for blood.

Bin Laden once a friend of the West,buried at sea,yeah right!

Bush and Blair are the reasons why the ME is so unstable IMO .

Which is wrong of course.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Back to your old politicians trick....If you can't back up your argument go personal



Or answer a question with a question

What question have I skipped? I answered a couple and after that you were making statements.

I merely asked if you agreed with Corbyn's stance as his was laid out quite succinctly so if you agreed with it that cuts to the chase somewhat.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

It's far from certain that Russia would veto anything after recent events.China might -but that's an issue that needs to be faced.

What's absolutely certain is that if the British parliament votes for a bombing campaign in Syria next week, then a lot more people will be dying and not only in Syria,either.

Of course Russia would veto. They are there for their own agenda (and yes the west are there for their own agenda also) They are backing their ally so any deal with the west would have to have Assad at the helm. Something unacceptable to the majority in Syria and the reason the Arab spring spread to Syria in first place.
Can't leave anything to the UN - their track record is appalling.

 

[Gt Yarmouth Shrimper]

When America declared Bin Laden was their most wanted claiming he masterminded 9/11(even though Bin Laden denied involvement)they the Americans galvanised every extremist.Bush steamed into Iraq helping one tribe whilst royally hacking off the other side.America then crept into Pakistan and "murdered" Bin Laden which again had the extremists baying for blood.

Bin Laden once a friend of the West,buried at sea,yeah right!

Bush and Blair are the reasons why the ME is so unstable IMO .

Read your history. The ME has been unstable since biblical times.
The only way to make it more stable is to enable the people to have prosperity, which is when they will reject the notion of an imaginary friend in the sky.

 

[mrsblue]

Read your history. The ME has been unstable since biblical times.
The only way to make it more stable is to enable the people to have prosperity, which is when they will reject the notion of an imaginary friend in the sky.

Of course the ME has been bubbling over for centuries BUT they only focused on the West when we invaded their countries.

Ask the question,why do they hate our way of living and westerners in particular ,they absoulatey hate Ametica,why?.

The Western leaders are all bonkers,first they want to bomb Assad then change their mind,they prevent people from going to Syria,they have thousands on the watch list but admit they cannot watch them all,they knew every attacker who carried out London,Rigby,Paris and Madrid yet their hands were tied so they say because of human rights zzzzzzzzzz.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Even though you agreed with me previously that it is nigh in impossible to get the UN to agree on anything? That's a risk I, and I suspect a lot of people, wouldn't be prepared to take.

It also seems this puts you at odds with Corduroy himself because I doubt he, being a pacifist, will ever be persuaded to vote for war. Good job his days seem to be numbered. He's already doing more harm than good.

There is an honourable tradition of pacifism in the Labour movement going right back to the time when George Lansbury was leader of the PLP and before.

While I'm not a pacifist myself, I respect the views of people who are.As far as JC is concerned, I expect there'll be a free vote in the PLP,which will get him off the hook,this time at least.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34950778

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

And your anti-tory not to mention anti-Cameron hysteria isn't remarkable? you hypocrite tangers.:stunned:

Wouldn't say I'm hysterically anti-Cameron at all.I just think he's a slick PR man,that's all.

 

[Firestorm]

Of course the ME has been bubbling over for centuries BUT they only focused on the West when we invaded their countries.

Ask the question,why do they hate our way of living and westerners in particular ,they absoulatey hate Ametica,why?.

The Western leaders are all bonkers,first they want to bomb Assad then change their mind,they prevent people from going to Syria,they have thousands on the watch list but admit they cannot watch them all,they knew every attacker who carried out London,Rigby,Paris and Madrid yet their hands were tied so they say because of human rights zzzzzzzzzz.

But the west have been invading the Middle east for years, the crusades being one of the first examples.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

1. It's a thread about Jeremy Corbyn - the article I posted is about - wait for it - Jeremy Corbyn
2. As already mentioned by Swiss Tony I think, you're a hypocrite. Mind you I think most if not all on these boards are already aware of this.
3. The anti Jeremy Corbyn stuff is in full flow mostly from the PLP.

Please explain what precisely makes me a hypocrite.

Of course Russia would veto. They are there for their own agenda (and yes the west are there for their own agenda also) They are backing their ally so any deal with the west would have to have Assad at the helm. Something unacceptable to the majority in Syria and the reason the Arab spring spread to Syria in first place.
Can't leave anything to the UN - their track record is appalling.

We won't know this for sure unless a motion is actually put before the UN.The fact that it wasn't in the case of Iraq is partly why we're in this current mess now,

 

[mrsblue]

But the west have been invading the Middle east for years, the crusades being one of the first examples.

Very true but how many Muslims have the West killed with their bombs and bullets in the last 14 year's?

 

[Firestorm]

Personally , I think that Corbyns ideals are commendable, an anti violence, peace and harmony situation, with the better off looking out for those who are less fortunate, is something all societies should be striving for.
However, this is wholly unworkable unless all societies are on board, and, to a lesser degree, all of each society embraces it too.
Which is where Corbyn is in a quandry, does he go with his principles , trying to lead by example and influence others to follow by negotiation ? And doing so risk alienation from within, leave the nation in a potentially vunerable situation regarding attack from those who are yet to embrace his ideals and been seen as weak.
Or does he state his ideals then go against them, leaving him open to criticism for hypocrisy.

That is where being a politician and having strong political ideals are often not compatible, paricularly in a world of politicians who are often in it for themselves, and spend time working the electorate for continued support instead of what is best for the wider good.

Corbyn, imho, is a good man, with good politics, he is not, however, going to make it in this current climate.

 

[Firestorm]

Very true but how many Muslims have the West killed with their bombs and bullets in the last 14 year's?

Out of interest why 14 years, What about those killed in the first Iraq war ? Didnt that turn the Middle east against west? Didnt the forceful occupation of Palestine and the formation of the Israeli state by the West and their guilty conscience alienate Arabs ?
The disrespect for the Middle east for anything other than their natural resources has been around for years