|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650 |
But in his letter to MPs, he said: "We've all been horrified by the despicable attacks in Paris and are determined to see the defeat of ISIS.
"Our first priority must be the security of Britain and the safety of the British people. The issue now is whether what the PM is proposing strengthens, or undermines, our national security.
"I do not believe that the PM today made a convincing case that extending UK bombing to Syria would meet that crucial test. Nor did it satisfactorily answer the questions raised by us and the Foreign Affairs Committee.
"In particular, the PM did not set out a coherent strategy, coordinated through the UN for the defeat of ISIS. Nor has he been able to explain what a credible and acceptable ground forces could retake and hold territory freed from ISIS control by an intensified air campaign.
"In my view, the PM has been unable to explain the contribution of additional UK bombing to a comprehensive negotiated political settlement of the Syrian civil war, or its likely impact on the threat of terrorist attacks in the UK.
"For these, and other reasons, I do not believe the PM's current proposal for air strikes in Syria will protect our security and therefore cannot support it."
Could not agree more, there is no solve the situation strategy ..it will only get worse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
But in his letter to MPs, he said: "We've all been horrified by the despicable attacks in Paris and are determined to see the defeat of ISIS.
"Our first priority must be the security of Britain and the safety of the British people. The issue now is whether what the PM is proposing strengthens, or undermines, our national security.
"I do not believe that the PM today made a convincing case that extending UK bombing to Syria would meet that crucial test. Nor did it satisfactorily answer the questions raised by us and the Foreign Affairs Committee.
"In particular, the PM did not set out a coherent strategy, coordinated through the UN for the defeat of ISIS. Nor has he been able to explain what a credible and acceptable ground forces could retake and hold territory freed from ISIS control by an intensified air campaign.
"In my view, the PM has been unable to explain the contribution of additional UK bombing to a comprehensive negotiated political settlement of the Syrian civil war, or its likely impact on the threat of terrorist attacks in the UK.
"For these, and other reasons, I do not believe the PM's current proposal for air strikes in Syria will protect our security and therefore cannot support it."
Could not agree more, there is no solve the situation strategy ..it will only get worse. I don't agree with him I think there is a case but what I think does not matter in relation to the Labour Party what matters is his MP,s if they go against him he will be in an untenable position a shame as I want him to stay he is doing a great job. As for the British people all the polls show they could not care less what he thinks
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
No apparently the answer was we ain't giving you any evidence..shame as perhaps a whole war could have been avoided. I think the problem was they had no evidence but even if they did I doubt they would have showed them . So after sept 11th you think we should have got into a legal debate with the Taliban ?
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650 |
But in his letter to MPs, he said: "We've all been horrified by the despicable attacks in Paris and are determined to see the defeat of ISIS.
"Our first priority must be the security of Britain and the safety of the British people. The issue now is whether what the PM is proposing strengthens, or undermines, our national security.
"I do not believe that the PM today made a convincing case that extending UK bombing to Syria would meet that crucial test. Nor did it satisfactorily answer the questions raised by us and the Foreign Affairs Committee.
"In particular, the PM did not set out a coherent strategy, coordinated through the UN for the defeat of ISIS. Nor has he been able to explain what a credible and acceptable ground forces could retake and hold territory freed from ISIS control by an intensified air campaign.
"In my view, the PM has been unable to explain the contribution of additional UK bombing to a comprehensive negotiated political settlement of the Syrian civil war, or its likely impact on the threat of terrorist attacks in the UK.
"For these, and other reasons, I do not believe the PM's current proposal for air strikes in Syria will protect our security and therefore cannot support it."
Could not agree more, there is no solve the situation strategy ..it will only get worse. I don't agree with him I think there is a case but what I think does not matter in relation to the Labour Party what matters is his MP,s if they go against him he will be in an untenable position a shame as I want him to stay he is doing a great job. As for the British people all the polls show they could not care less what he thinks they went out and voted him in when his own party didn't want him. so hope they do so again...and he is more popular than ever... A sane non elite person in charge ..wow that hasn't happened to u lot in forever http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...r-a6746491.html
Last edited by EMP; 26/11/15 06:27 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
It is just normal procedure, like if any country asks another country to hand over someone they produce evidence to say why they want him. And who was going to check the evidence from the taliban side? Or you expected them to say, we will not hand Ben Laden over and FU? Was the taliban even the accepted authority in Afganistan then? Are you naïve, a fool or just want to have an argument?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650 |
yes they were the administrative govt of afghan - I am not looking for anything on this particular minor point..just pointing out it might have been an avenue at least tried.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650 |
No apparently the answer was we ain't giving you any evidence..shame as perhaps a whole war could have been avoided. I think the problem was they had no evidence but even if they did I doubt they would have showed them . So after sept 11th you think we should have got into a legal debate with the Taliban ? Sept 11 is a minor terrorist attack in relation to the terrorist campaigns the US has inflicted on other countries in the world. Horrific event but like not even a drop in the ocean towards the millions the west has murdered..if everyone reacted like the neocons did the world would not exist.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394 |
But in his letter to MPs, he said: "We've all been horrified by the despicable attacks in Paris and are determined to see the defeat of ISIS.
"Our first priority must be the security of Britain and the safety of the British people. The issue now is whether what the PM is proposing strengthens, or undermines, our national security.
"I do not believe that the PM today made a convincing case that extending UK bombing to Syria would meet that crucial test. Nor did it satisfactorily answer the questions raised by us and the Foreign Affairs Committee.
"In particular, the PM did not set out a coherent strategy, coordinated through the UN for the defeat of ISIS. Nor has he been able to explain what a credible and acceptable ground forces could retake and hold territory freed from ISIS control by an intensified air campaign.
"In my view, the PM has been unable to explain the contribution of additional UK bombing to a comprehensive negotiated political settlement of the Syrian civil war, or its likely impact on the threat of terrorist attacks in the UK.
"For these, and other reasons, I do not believe the PM's current proposal for air strikes in Syria will protect our security and therefore cannot support it."
Could not agree more, there is no solve the situation strategy ..it will only get worse. I don't agree with him I think there is a case but what I think does not matter in relation to the Labour Party what matters is his MP,s if they go against him he will be in an untenable position a shame as I want him to stay he is doing a great job. As for the British people all the polls show they could not care less what he thinks they went out and voted him in when his own party didn't want him. so hope they do so again...and he is more popular than ever... A sane non elite person in charge ..wow that hasn't happened to u lot in forever http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...r-a6746491.html The bloke is a fukking moron emp and he'll never run my country. None of his MP's are behind him and as soon as the public notice how woolly and weak he is (see not having the conviction to tell his MP's to vote against Trident as he doesn't agree) they'll turn off the protest vote. He will be the death of this country if he got in but will be the death of the Labour party way before that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650 |
But in his letter to MPs, he said: "We've all been horrified by the despicable attacks in Paris and are determined to see the defeat of ISIS.
"Our first priority must be the security of Britain and the safety of the British people. The issue now is whether what the PM is proposing strengthens, or undermines, our national security.
"I do not believe that the PM today made a convincing case that extending UK bombing to Syria would meet that crucial test. Nor did it satisfactorily answer the questions raised by us and the Foreign Affairs Committee.
"In particular, the PM did not set out a coherent strategy, coordinated through the UN for the defeat of ISIS. Nor has he been able to explain what a credible and acceptable ground forces could retake and hold territory freed from ISIS control by an intensified air campaign.
"In my view, the PM has been unable to explain the contribution of additional UK bombing to a comprehensive negotiated political settlement of the Syrian civil war, or its likely impact on the threat of terrorist attacks in the UK.
"For these, and other reasons, I do not believe the PM's current proposal for air strikes in Syria will protect our security and therefore cannot support it."
Could not agree more, there is no solve the situation strategy ..it will only get worse. I don't agree with him I think there is a case but what I think does not matter in relation to the Labour Party what matters is his MP,s if they go against him he will be in an untenable position a shame as I want him to stay he is doing a great job. As for the British people all the polls show they could not care less what he thinks they went out and voted him in when his own party didn't want him. so hope they do so again...and he is more popular than ever... A sane non elite person in charge ..wow that hasn't happened to u lot in forever http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...r-a6746491.html The bloke is a fukking moron emp and he'll never run my country. None of his MP's are behind him and as soon as the public notice how woolly and weak he is (see not having the conviction to tell his MP's to vote against Trident as he doesn't agree) they'll turn off the protest vote. He will be the death of this country if he got in but will be the death of the Labour party way before that. you are entitled to call him what u like, but he is gathering support from the people..nobody wants to spend tons of money on fecking nuclear missiles ,hope some of his mp's resign so he can get his own people in. might see on election day the long lines at the polls that got him elected..hope so
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 9,650 |
I disagree, he follows positions that mirror the positions of the increasingly more political public..anti-war, anti-nuclear, anti -neo liberalism .. what the public were being served did not represent them so they went out an picked a guy that did represent them and got him voted despite political and media attacks on him.. He is no crack pot imo..he seems that way to u maybe -maybe cause u are used to horrible people running ur country i dunno..but corbyn seems to want to actually serve the interests of you lot, not like the other guys whose only interest is in the elites .
|
|
|
|
|
