Should Cameron apologise?

[ghost rider]

I have also been watching and listening, (until about 4.0pm,) and have been impressed with the quality of the debate, and things said on both sides.

 

I still don't know who's right, (though I think I still vere towards not bombing) I'm glad I don't have to vote. However I do feel that without Corbyn, this debate wouldn't be happening or have generated such interest.

 

I know that ISIS is evil, but why are we getting involved? Surely Syria has enough of their own young men to form a formidable army against them.

 

We are all involved already,the clock is just counting down to when we will be attacked.IS have silent fighters all over the world in every country just waiting for the moment to strike us.I fear all out war is inevitable it is just a matter of time.

[lottiecass]

and none of that still means they support terrorists, it just means they dont want to kill innocents

 

All conflicts involve innocent deaths. By not bombing isis harms them in some way,of course not it will be one less for them to fight.

[scania]

as has been said already start by starving them of support / members, cash and arms, you dont do any of that by bombing innocents

 

And that's where the problem lies. Nobody knows whom is supporting them. And the footsoldiers are coming from everywhere, moving freely from country to country. In short, they are really a mystery, and the world's greatest foe.

[ghost rider]

I don't expect ISIS to suddenly become human at all. I just think that bombing them will create more members of ISIS than we will kill. They are getting guns from somewhere. They are getting money from somewhere. Remove their guns and remove their funding and suddenly they aren't a massive threat anymore. There may be pockets of 'homegrown' supporters that will be unaffected but the bombs wouldn't have touched them anyway. Honestly, I think everyone on this thread and in the entire country (bar the crazy ISIS supporters) wants them gone and NOW, but some of us think removing their ability to hurt us is better than simply bombing them, and I've not read much to change my mind today even though I have tried (probably failed) to keep an open mind. As I've put on here before, I'd support full military intervention more than I will bombs.

Suspicions are with Turkey has to how they are getting supplies and also who they are selling oil too.

[sgtkate]

Suspicions are with Turkey has to how they are getting supplies and also who they are selling oil too.

 

Oh god yes. Putin has surely called it hasn't he? Or is it another bluff...this is why I'm certain we should stay well out of it for purely selfish reasons...we could end up on the wrong side of a massive war against Russia if things keep playing out how they are currently.

[Jonny5]

Which country and which ideals?

 

I'm uncomfortable with making bakers, accountants, doctors, students etc etc conscripts into a war not of their making. Bombed from one side by Assad, terrorised from the other side by ISIS (or whatever), never held a gun in their lives....they tried that in Iraq. Train local people to be soldiers and so ensure a stable country then when the first Isis flag appears on the horizon they all run like shi'ites.

Not only all that but they don't have the allegiance to their country the same way some westerner's do. Syria is a recent invention and people in that part of the world have allegiance to their family, tribe and religion before their country.

[ghost rider]

Oh god yes. Putin has surely called it hasn't he? Or is it another bluff...this is why I'm certain we should stay well out of it for purely selfish reasons...we could end up on the wrong side of a massive war against Russia if things keep playing out how they are currently.

 

This link explains how ISIS do it.

http://http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/19/-sp-islamic-state-oil-empire-iraq-isis

[milquetoast1]

and none of that still means they support terrorists, it just means they dont want to kill innocents

 

He didn't accuse anybody of supporting terrorists.

 

He said: "You don't want to walk through the lobbies with Jeremy Corbyn and a bunch of terrorist sympathisers."

 

Quite different.

 

Also it is not saying that everybody who votes differently to him are terrorist sympathisers, but people who vote differently to him will be voting alongside terrorist sympathisers.

 

Quite true. He is clearly referring to major personalities in the Labour party. Those who call Hezbollah and Hamas their "friends". Those who supported the IRA and Livingstone who sympathised with the motives of the 7/7 bombers.

 

Some of us have forgot our Boolean algebra.

 

Although we can accuse Cameron of using unnecessary emotive hyperbole with his party MPs, this is no different to Corbyn using unnecessary emotive language with his MPs, using veiled threats and even leaving some in tears.

Edited December 2, 2015 by milquetoast1

[sgtkate]

He didn't accuse anybody of supporting terrorists.

 

He said: "You don't want to walk through the lobbies with Jeremy Corbyn and a bunch of terrorist sympathisers."

 

Quite different.

 

Also it is not saying that everybody who votes differently to him are terrorist sympathisers, but people who vote differently to him will be voting alongside terrorist sympathisers.

 

Quite true. He is clearly referring to major personalities in the Labour party. Those who call Hezbollah and Hamas their "friends". Those who supported the IRA and Livingstone who sympathised with the motives of the 7/7 bombers.

 

Some of us have forgot our Boolean algebra.

 

Although we can accuse Cameron of using unnecessary emotive hyperbole with his party MPs, this is no different to Corbyn using unnecessary emotive language with his MPs, using veiled threats and even leaving some in tears.

 

As it's fairly well accepted that Saudi Arabia are funding ISIS at least partially, that a man who bows to them is a terror sympathiser and funder. Perhaps Cameron should vote alongside Corbyn on that basis.

[Halibut]

What about all the innocent men women and children that will die, if nothing is done?

 

Tragic, but their deaths won't be at our hands. Bombing Syria now will result in a greater toll of death and suffering in the long run - and if you think it'll do anything other than make a Paris style attack on London any less likely then you're wrong.