Jeremy Corbyn 'cannot support UK air strikes in Syria'

[Johnnyuk123]

Ok we now all know we are gonna bomb. So lets all talk about what we write on those bombs before we drop em. Smiiley faces is too easy, we need something creative.

[Tom4784]

Bloodthirsty hypocritical fools, the lot of them.

[Vicky.]

I honestly still do not know where I stand on this :laugh:

I can't see what bombing them will do, besides maybe help them recruit and kill a few civilians

But I can't agree with doing nothing either

I think the 'negotiate' idea is barmy

But I also think airstrikes are not a good idea...

[Vicky.]

Also this 'britain is safer tonight' is absolute bollocks. If anything, we are more of a target now...

[smudgie]

I honestly still do not know where I stand on this :laugh:

I can't see what bombing them will do, besides maybe help them recruit and kill a few civilians

But I can't agree with doing nothing either

I think the 'negotiate' idea is barmy

But I also think airstrikes are not a good idea...

I am pleased that they won the vote, but I am hoping they use it very carefully.
I suppose my thoughts are that we can't just sit around doing nothing.
Negotiation is out of the question as is surrender on their part so I expect there will bound to be bloodshed sadly.

[Vicky.]

When it comes to grounds troops going in (which it has to..realistically) we should really allow our female troopers to take them out. Apparently if killed by a woman you do not get your 798 virgins or whatever it is..

[joeysteele]

I did not deride the Labour Party having a free vote, just stating the fact that they had the free vote but appear to be suffering the consequences of the atrocious treatment given out. Not heard much moaning from the Tories..whip and all.
As I said, I would have liked a free vote on all sides. The fact that Mr. Cameron decided against it is hardly in my hands, so no double standards here.
I think we are all fully aware of your interest in politics Joey, I myself have complimented you on it in the past.
There was no mention of me knowing more about politics than you, just the fact that I do know enough to get by, as I said, I have followed it for many years.
Who knows or even gives a damn about who knows more than anyone else on any given subject:shrug: hardly a competition is it?
One thing is for certain, you really have no idea what I think in any depth, sp pointless taking pot shots really. A I have already stated, I am aware, as are most people, of the shenanigans that go on behind closed doors when it comes to politics. Filthiest game on earth.:laugh:




It is indeed,I wonder why I am so involved in it at times and then even want to be a MP.
I guess,it is because I believe there can be a different politics with MPs more accountable to voters than always on party lines.
Of course all manifesto pledges have to be supported by the MPs of that party when in govt. but for me, many other things such as military conflict, death penalty and what was 'not' in the manifesto should be open to more free voting.

Then again I would like NHS, Education to name 2 depts, removed from the political football nonsense and policies agreed across the board which would mean no changes as each govt changed just as a tit for tat changing basis.

On this today however,I felt strongly we needed to see how MPs would have voted, had they been just like us.
No party lines but a true and real decision made with no pressures whatsoever, the issue itself was pressure enough for anyone to take on, in my view.
Hopefully one day a more consensus type of politics will come into being and it should be easy to do as there are far more consensus politicians in all Parties than there are not.
Sadly they keep quiet however and still go about on Party lines.

[smudgie]

When it comes to grounds troops going in (which it has to..realistically) we should really allow our female troopers to take them out. Apparently if killed by a woman you do not get your 798 virgins or whatever it is..

Well, I would sign up but I am too old and falling to bits now.

I want to know where all these virgins are..and what they are doing in the afterlife waiting around to give themselves to murderous scumbags.

[Kizzy]

TAG TEAMING???? Come on. I have single handedly argued against 4 of you on here - Were you desisting because of 'Tag Teaming' then? No.

Stop with the unfair tactics and false claims.

We are discussing and my comment to him was relevant and true because you either do NOT answer at all, or NEVER give a straight answer.

Fair comment 'is all'.

And NO - you still have not answered my question from this afternoon.

Me having an opinion isn't tag teaming, I'm not a performing monkey Kirk I'm not beholden to you or whoever. I gave you a response, just be grateful for that.

[smudgie]

[/B]


It is indeed,I wonder why I am so involved in it at times and then even want to be a MP.
I guess,it is because I believe there can be a different politics with MPs more accountable to voters than always on party lines.
Of course all manifesto pledges have to be supported by the MPs of that party when in govt. but for me, many other things such as military conflict, death penalty and what was 'not' in the manifesto should be open to more free voting.

Then again I would like NHS, Education to name 2 depts, removed from the political football nonsense and policies agreed across the board which would mean no changes as each govt changed just as a tit for tat changing basis.

On this today however,I felt strongly we needed to see how MPs would have voted, had they been just like us.
No party lines but a true and real decision made with no pressures whatsoever, the issue itself was pressure enough for anyone to take on, in my view.
Hopefully one day a more consensus type of politics will come into being and it should be easy to do as there are far more consensus politicians in all Parties than there are not.
Sadly they keep quite however and still go about on Party lines.


Now see, this is easy to answer Joey..you want to be an MP as you feel it in your blood.
At your age I had no interest in the world around me, apart from the love of my life and enjoying myself. Far too busy for anything so serious. You on the other hand live and breathe it.
I have never known so much deep thinking about this Syria issue, thankfully I didn't have to vote, even now I am worried where it will all end, but I would have been more worried if it had gone the other way if I am honest.
I am just glad it is done, I can now stop watching the box trying to glean information from all sides.

[bots]

British planes have just taken off for Syria/Iraq from Cyprus

[kirklancaster]

But you can't blow up an ideology.

I respect your right to your view and understand your misgivings about our joining the bombing campaign - given the sheer amount of propaganda and deliberate scare tactic misinformation by the against lobby - but the most overspouted cliche most favoured by those against-lobbyists, is that "You cannot destroy/bomb/beat/defeat an ideology" and it is just so much meaningless twaddle - usually bleated by people who do not even understand what an 'ideology' is: .

Ideology (noun) - A set of aims and ideas… a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things, as in common sense… The main purpose is to offer change in society… systems of abstract thought applied to public matters. Implicitly every political tendency entails an ideology.

Does the insane pseudo-religious claptrap of ISIS that they want to 'restore' the entire world to a 'Caliphate' REALLY sound anything like the description of true 'Ideology' above?

And what about the ideology of Western Democratic countries - 'Freedom', 'Democratic Values', 'Civil Rights' etc etc - Does the West having an ideology stop ISIS from bombing the hell out of us? Do ISIS believe that "You can't bomb an ideology"? Obviously not.

Although it is strictly true that whilever one devotee of a particular ideology is still alive, then so does the ideology live, it is B.S. to say that ideologies can't be killed to all intents and purposes - or in other words, the less devotees of a particular ideology there are, the less relevant that ideology becomes.

The more IS we terminate the less of a threat and more 'manageable' and 'containable' their 'ideology' becomes.

Todays vote was THE CORRECT decision.

[kirklancaster]

Me having an opinion isn't tag teaming, I'm not a performing monkey Kirk I'm not beholden to you or whoever. I gave you a response, just be grateful for that.

I'm leaving it here Kizzy because I do not want needless arguing, but I will point out your penchant for not practising what you preach. You join in with three others against one member and that - in your mind - is just "having an opinion", but when I agree with something another member says I am "Tag Teaming". :shrug:

[kirklancaster]

British planes have just taken off for Syria/Iraq from Cyprus

God watch over them and give them great success, then bring them home safely.

[kirklancaster]

I honestly still do not know where I stand on this :laugh:

I can't see what bombing them will do, besides maybe help them recruit and kill a few civilians

But I can't agree with doing nothing either

I think the 'negotiate' idea is barmy

But I also think airstrikes are not a good idea...

You sound like a TRUE politician Vicky. :laugh:

[Kizzy]

I'm leaving it here Kizzy because I do not want needless arguing, but I will point out your penchant for not practising what you preach. You join in with three others against one member and that - in your mind - is just "having an opinion", but when I agree with something another member says I am "Tag Teaming". :shrug:

I had been online 10 minutes when you quoted me today, so you just invented that scenario.
When it adds nothing to the thread but mocking comments at my expense I feel justified suggesting it was that yes.

[Kizzy]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2015/dec/02/steve-bell-on-cameron-and-syria-airstrikes-cartoon

Corbyns statement

'Parliament has just voted to launch airstrikes in Syria. I am reminded of the messages I have received in recent days from my constituents who have expressed deep concern for family in Syria. I also think of our armed forces whose lives will be put in danger.

The fact of the matter is, David Cameron’s case was not convincing, lacking either credible ground troops or a plan for a diplomatic settlement. Since he first made his case for airstrikes in Syria, last Thursday, opposition has mounted; in the country, in parliament and in the Labour Party.

It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Prime Minister realised opposition to his ill thought-out rush to war was growing – and he needed to hold the vote before it slipped from his hands. I have argued, and will continue to do so, that we should re-double our efforts to secure a diplomatic and political end to the conflict in Syria.

British service men and women will now be in harm’s way and the loss of innocent lives is sadly almost inevitable.'

[bots]

Corbyn just seems to me someone who is unwilling to accept the will of parliament. If he was a true leader he would now get fully behind the decision.

[arista]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/03/00/article-3343475-2F01315E00000578-32_964x499.jpg

[Kizzy]

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

[Ammi]

..I guess that one of the worst human feelings in the world is helplessness and IS have left the world helpless to their attacks on every day people, so there's that feeling that doing something is the best thing...I don't think though that it always is and am not convinced with this...

..anyways, what will be, will be and although I'm not a person of religion but in the spirit of quotes and of Christmas, as Tiny Tim said...God bless us, every one..and obviously including the people of Syria also...

[bots]

UK launches first Syria air strikes

RAF Tornado jets have carried out their first air strikes against so-called Islamic State in Syria, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.

Four Tornados took off from RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus shortly after MPs voted to approve bombing.

The strikes focused on six targets in an oil field under IS control in eastern Syria, the BBC understands.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34992032

[lostalex]

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

this vote didn't start a War... the war already existed for years. ISIS has had tons of slaves for a long time, mostly women and children. the only ignorance is burying your head in the sand and thinking the UK can pretend it isn't happening.

this vote was about choosing a side instead of just burying your head in the sand.

[AProducer'sWetDream]

I respect your right to your view and understand your misgivings about our joining the bombing campaign - given the sheer amount of propaganda and deliberate scare tactic misinformation by the against lobby - but the most overspouted cliche most favoured by those against-lobbyists, is that "You cannot destroy/bomb/beat/defeat an ideology" and it is just so much meaningless twaddle - usually bleated by people who do not even understand what an 'ideology' is: .

Ideology (noun) - A set of aims and ideas… a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things, as in common sense… The main purpose is to offer change in society… systems of abstract thought applied to public matters. Implicitly every political tendency entails an ideology.

Does the insane pseudo-religious claptrap of ISIS that they want to 'restore' the entire world to a 'Caliphate' REALLY sound anything like the description of true 'Ideology' above?

And what about the ideology of Western Democratic countries - 'Freedom', 'Democratic Values', 'Civil Rights' etc etc - Does the West having an ideology stop ISIS from bombing the hell out of us? Do ISIS believe that "You can't bomb an ideology"? Obviously not.

Although it is strictly true that whilever one devotee of a particular ideology is still alive, then so does the ideology live, it is B.S. to say that ideologies can't be killed to all intents and purposes - or in other words, the less devotees of a particular ideology there are, the less relevant that ideology becomes.

The more IS we terminate the less of a threat and more 'manageable' and 'containable' their 'ideology' becomes.

Todays vote was THE CORRECT decision.

The more (innocent) people we kill in Syria, though, their ability to racialise and recruit people in the country and grow in strength increases, potentially at a faster rate than we can take out members of IS.We are almost playing into their hands by creating martyrs and possibly civilian casualties- do we really think IS members are afraid of dying for whatever twisted kind of Islam they believe in?

[kirklancaster]

Gunfight at the Quotations corral

Actually, I think my sig is the best quotation in this event.

:laugh: THIS has gone into my book of 'Plagiarised Kirkisms' :laugh:

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROk79KRoEzwg17KAPwE1EQylpewQKax QSgPSJ7ow_BIkSJhiBLjA

Gunfight at the Quotations corral

[Samm]

Imagine living in Syria and hearing that your country will be bombed :(

Disgraceful there's plenty of other ways this could of been tackled without war.

[Samm]

Also this 'britain is safer tonight' is absolute bollocks. If anything, we are more of a target now...

.

[joeysteele]

..I guess that one of the worst human feelings in the world is helplessness and IS have left the world helpless to their attacks on every day people, so there's that feeling that doing something is the best thing...I don't think though that it always is and am not convinced with this...

..anyways, what will be, will be and although I'm not a person of religion but in the spirit of quotes and of Christmas, as Tiny Tim said...God bless us, every one..and obviously including the people of Syria also...

It is and those against the action should not be made to feel they are wrong just as those in favour should not take the moral high ground either.

I cannot believe I am now going to say this but I will qualify it with I wish it had been all he said as to the vote in the Commons.
I am going to quote David Cameron and the 'right' thing he said yesterday, which was there is honour in both those voting for and against in the vote last night.

That is correct and those against the action should not be getting called out on being cowardly, unpatriotic and often even worse, just as those in favour should not be derided as warmongers either.

This was a hard decision to come to for anyone, MP or down to every single UK citizen.
For me as I Have said many times, the only 'wrong' thing in the whole issue whatever the result was to be, is that all MPs of all parties should have been able to vote as their heart and minds led them to, and not be forced either way.

[Kizzy]

this vote didn't start a War... the war already existed for years. ISIS has had tons of slaves for a long time, mostly women and children. the only ignorance is burying your head in the sand and thinking the UK can pretend it isn't happening.

this vote was about choosing a side instead of just burying your head in the sand.

And the plan to arm moderates worked when America did it...
What's that saying. the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome?

'The atom bombs are piling up in the factories, the police are prowling through the cities, the lies are streaming from the loudspeakers, but the earth is still going round the sun.'

[kirklancaster]

The more (innocent) people we kill in Syria, though, their ability to racialise and recruit people in the country and grow in strength increases, potentially at a faster rate than we can take out members of IS.We are almost playing into their hands by creating martyrs and possibly civilian casualties- do we really think IS members are afraid of dying for whatever twisted kind of Islam they believe in?

With respect APWD - This is all yet more B.S propaganda and overspouted cliche.

"The more (innocent) people we kill in Syria, though, their ability to racialise and recruit people in the country and grow in strength increases, potentially at a faster rate than we can take out members of IS."

The only civilians who are in the same vicinity as these murdering turds are the unfortunate ones being held captive by force or fear, and these 'captives' along with those who have already fled the country, and all the relatives of those who have been beheaded, raped and sold into sex slavery, or buried in mass graves, DESPISE ISIS. Hardly suitable subjects for 'radicalisation' to the ISIS cause.

Was there a HUGE surge of eager applicants from ordinary Germans to enlist in the Nazi military after our destruction of Dresden?

NO.

Was there a huge surge from non-domiciled Germans living elsewhere?

NO.

Did we see the hatred felt by the French for their Nazi occupiers suddenly change to hatred for the allies when over 68,000 French civilians became the innocent casualities of our bombing raids?

NO.

Check out footage of the ecstatic, grateful French when they were finally liberated by the allies if you need corroboration.

Apart from a few scattered cretins in WESTERN Countries who ALREADY detest the West - despite availing themselves of all the many benefits we freely afford them - there is NO evidence that bombing, or any other type of retaliatory Military Action, breeds mass 'radicalisation' and enlistment.

"We are almost playing into their hands by creating martyrs"

More pure baloney.

Without googling, do you know any of the following?:

Ludmila of Bohemia
Thomas More
Margaret Clitherhoe

Is'haq Badran
Baha Alyan

or how about Bobby Sands?

NO - I didn't think so. The importance of so-called 'Martyrs' is vastly inflated, and no matter what 'cause' they died for, 'Martyrs' are soon forgotten by all but the most fanatical - if they are remembered at all.

A dead terrorist is NOT a 'Martyr' he is just a dead terrorist.

"do we really think IS members are afraid of dying for whatever twisted kind of Islam they believe in?"

No, we do not think that TRUE braindead IS believers are afraid to die for their 'cause', but a very sizeable number of those murdering bastards who are now fighting under the IS banner are NOT true believers.

They are CONSCRIPTS - from the peoples ISIS have conquered - reluctant 'soldiers of Allah' FORCED to join ISIS under threat of death and beheading, and they are MERCENARIES, bought and paid for from the proceeds of stolen oil fields, extortion monies, ransoms, sold sex slaves, and pillaging spoils, and this is EXACTLY how ISLAM originally spread under Muhammud over a thousand years ago.

And if you know your history, this 'dilution' of true believers is exactly what will contribute to the defeat of ISIS the more that we bomb and shoot the **** out of them.

True cretin believers WILL give their life, but the more that ISIS are subjected to heavier and heavier losses, the more that Mercenaries - who have had a relatively easy unchallenged ride until recently - will STOP joining, and the chances are that FORCED CONSCRIPTS will FLEE at the earliest opportunity, leaving an ever more depleted ISIS army and a weaker one.

Forced Barbarian 'Soldiers' and non-Roman Mercenaries were absorbed into the Roman Army as the Great Roman Empire expanded, and this 'dilution' was one of the causes for the fall of that empire. Not THE cause, but one of them.

As the Romans later suffered defeats and reverses because of the other causes, the mercenaries fled, unwilling to give their life for 'Rome' - a 'cause' they did NOT really believe in - and the Barbarians who had been FORCED to fight for Rome also fled, or actually vented all those years of seething but hidden resentment and hatred, and actually TURNED on the Romans.

The sack of Rome by the Visigoths was actually led by Alaric - a Roman trained ex-army FORCED soldier.

ISIS are suffering defeats. Their advance has not only been halted, but REVERSED, and THEY CAN AND WILL BE BEATEN.

Do not fall for the propaganda which - like MOST of the Politically Correct BullShot was originally planted as seeds by sinister parties with covert anti-Western agendas for the gullible to water and nurture.

[Livia]

Imagine living in Syria and hearing that your country will be bombed :(

Disgraceful there's plenty of other ways this could of been tackled without war.

Like what?

[kirklancaster]

Like what?

Ha ha - ask away Livia, I am STILL awaiting proper answers to the same question from others who made similar claims.

[Livia]

Ha ha - ask away Livia, I am STILL awaiting proper answers to the same question from others who made similar claims.

Morning Kirk.

I'm looking forward to someone coming up with a better, practical, more workable idea. No one's joyous to be going to war, are they? No one's punching the air... and yet the opposition seem to insinuate it's the boys going on a jolly. Which frankly couldn't be further from the truth.

[kirklancaster]

Morning Kirk.

I'm looking forward to someone coming up with a better, practical, more workable idea. No one's joyous to be going to war, are they? No one's punching the air... and yet the opposition seem to insinuate it's the boys going on a jolly. Which frankly couldn't be further from the truth.

Morning Liv.

You are correct. No one is pleased, but a lot of us KNOW when there is no alternative.

[Kizzy]

Ha ha - ask away Livia, I am STILL awaiting proper answers to the same question from others who made similar claims.

And you continue to goad...
Attack is not the best form of defence, it is an aggressive stance and puts a bigger target on our heads.
There was no request from NATO to intervene, we did not have to become involved at this time.

[Kizzy]

Morning Kirk.

I'm looking forward to someone coming up with a better, practical, more workable idea. No one's joyous to be going to war, are they? No one's punching the air... and yet the opposition seem to insinuate it's the boys going on a jolly. Which frankly couldn't be further from the truth.

Look back in the thread, there were loads laughing, punching the air and practically celebrating last nights decision.
I saw nobody from the opposition insinuating it was a 'jolly' that would be an equally pathetic response to the whooping imo.

[bots]

Imagine living in Syria and hearing that your country will be bombed :(

Disgraceful there's plenty of other ways this could of been tackled without war.

Lets be clear, we are bombing ISIS, the group that are torturing and beheading the ordinary Syrian people, we are not bombing civilians.

[Livia]

Look back in the thread, there were loads laughing, punching the air and practically celebrating last nights decision.
I saw nobody from the opposition insinuating it was a 'jolly' that would be an equally pathetic response to the whooping imo.

Maybe it's you who should be looking back through the thread.

People were applauding that we did the right thing. Not that we are going to war. Who, in their right mind, wants to go to war? But when there is no alternative, the bullet has to be bitten and we, along with 60 other countries, have decided this is the way to go. And I'm proud of that. That still doesn't mean I rejoice at the fact that some of our servicemen are probably going to return home covered with a flag.

[kirklancaster]

And you continue to goad...
Attack is not the best form of defence, it is an aggressive stance and puts a bigger target on our heads.
There was no request from NATO to intervene, we did not have to become involved at this time.

Oh FFS I am not goading - What are you trying to do? Get MORE of my innocuous posts removed? Get me another infraction?

I am stating a fact. I named no one and stated the plural word 'OTHERS' not singular word 'OTHER'.

Please just ignore my posts if they bother you so much - especially when they are NOT addressed directly to you, or specificaly mention you.

I have done nothing wrong.

If we make claims on a Serious Debates forum as if they are absolutes, then expect to be asked for corroboration. I did not mock you or sneer at you, I merely asked you (and others) what your solution was then seeing how you repeatedly criticised the Government strategy.

You did not answer, but you were not the only one who didn't - in fact NO ONE has answered - so why do you now claim that I am specifically goading YOU?

And to the Mods - please do not remove this post or infract me. I am merely answering in a civil manner yet another wrongful accusation.

[Kizzy]

Maybe it's you who should be looking back through the thread.

People were applauding that we did the right thing. Not that we are going to war. Who, in their right mind, wants to go to war? But when there is no alternative, the bullet has to be bitten and we, along with 60 other countries, have decided this is the way to go. And I'm proud of that. That still doesn't mean I rejoice at the fact that some of our servicemen are probably going to return home covered with a flag.

No they weren't because nobody knows if it's the right thing, that's why there were 10hrs of debates over it... it's not a black or white issue.
There could be 100 countries and until it was imperative I say no.

[Livia]

This is supposed to be a serious debate. The "againsts" on here do not reflect the "againsts" in society, which is fine. But no meaningful discussion can take place without the "againsts" making outrageous claims and turning it into a playground squabble. The discussion is not reflective and it is therefore pointless.

[Livia]

No they weren't because nobody knows if it's the right thing, that's why there were 10hrs of debates over it... it's not a black or white issue.
There could be 100 countries and until it was imperative I say no.

Yes, I know you're against.

You seem to labour under the illusion that anyone who is not against this hasn't thought it through. No one has thought about this more than those who are making the decisions and I trust them. It's not the first time this country has stood with its allies, and I hope it won't be the last.

[Kizzy]

This is supposed to be a serious debate. The "againsts" on here do not reflect the "againsts" in society, which is fine. But no meaningful discussion can take place without the "againsts" making outrageous claims and turning it into a playground squabble. The discussion is not reflective and it is therefore pointless.

What outrageous claims... That we haven't been attacked, that we will be seen as the aggressors?
Whoever and however society is represented anyone on the forum has a right to voice their view, you don't have to like it.

[Livia]

What outrageous claims... That we haven't been attacked, that we will be seen as the aggressors?
Whoever and however society is represented anyone on the forum has a right to voice their view, you don't have to like it.

I don't like it. Doesn't mean I don't think you have a right to your opinion, however far off the mark they are.

We haven't been attacked? Do you think not backing our allies would make us safer? Really? How many times do you think our security services have foiled attacks? It's been said many times since the Paris bombing... terrorists need to get lucky once, the security services need to get lucky every single hour of every single day. And thank God, up till now they have.

And the outrageous claims are that this hasn't been thought through, that it's short-sighed and all about ego... you know the claims I'm talking about, don't make me do bullet points for you.

[Kizzy]

I don't like it. Doesn't mean I don't think you have a right to your opinion, however far off the mark they are.

We haven't been attacked? Do you think not backing our allies would make us safer? Really? How many times do you think our security services have foiled attacks? It's been said many times since the Paris bombing... terrorists need to get lucky once, the security services need to get lucky every single hour of every single day. And thank God, up till now they have.

And the outrageous claims are that this hasn't been thought through, that it's short-sighed and all about ego... you know the claims I'm talking about, don't make me do bullet points for you.

Those were Dezzys claims not mine.

Good I'm glad I have your blessing to have an opinion, logically and factually we have not been attacked by forces emitting from Syria.

'Do you think not backing our allies would make us safer? '
Yes, as I said earlier I feel attacking would make us a bigger target than defending.
If NATO requested it then yes it would be a responsibility to aid allies... but that hasn't happened and now it's irrelevant.

[Vicky.]

Morning Kirk.

I'm looking forward to someone coming up with a better, practical, more workable idea. No one's joyous to be going to war, are they? No one's punching the air... and yet the opposition seem to insinuate it's the boys going on a jolly. Which frankly couldn't be further from the truth.

Maybe not on here but..

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syria-air-strikes-mhairi-black-vows-never-to-forget-the-noise-of-mps-cheering-bombs-a6758231.html

[joeysteele]

I don't think there is a right thing to do in this, it is sad the Middle East is again in the mess it is and part of that has to have blame laid at our interfering door,not all but a part of it.
There are people who think the diplomatic means and to this have not been exhausted,I am one of them,I still feel the Saudi's in particular and Turkey need looking at.
They are neither wrong or right in that view of diplomatic means being better, no one has the answer that at a stroke will sort this mess out.

The vote in the Commons last night for instance while overwhelming as to the result, still actually resulted in more elected Parties to Westminster 'not' actually supporting the action as opposed to the number that did, it is just the 2 bigger Parties provided the larger numbers for.

It is as Ammi said a difficult issue with feelings of helplessness from all sides of the argument.
Derision of one view against the other is rather petty,there is likely near an equal division among all UK citizens too for instance.

If those who supported the action are just going to put down those who were against and question those who would have liked to see another way tried,well none of us have the foresight as to the best way on this, if any of us think we have then we are deluding ourselves.

The poster who asked surely there was a better way, is not claiming to know a better way,they have the right to think that however without interrogation as to what they'd do.They are not a military person or govt with all info to hand.
Asking for a better way should not bring derision from those cock a hoop at the action being passed.

I would have probably voted for the action last night,only just,and with the heaviest of hearts however and fear I had not done the right or best thing.
What I will not do is be awkward towards those who wanted another way,or questioned why this was seen as the only way and also especially those who were still against it after the debate.
We are all not,and should not be either,possibly wonderful know alls who think only our way is the right and best way, and anyone with an alternative view or questions an issue is only worthy of derision and sarcasm.

[Livia]

Maybe not on here but..

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syria-air-strikes-mhairi-black-vows-never-to-forget-the-noise-of-mps-cheering-bombs-a6758231.html

Cheering the decision, more like. Nice twist though.

[Kizzy]

Cheering the decision, more like. Nice twist though.

Still not very sensitive it's not them that have to risk their lives is it?....

[Livia]

Still not very sensitive it's not them that have to risk their lives is it?....

Oh, they're not sensitive enough for you. I'm sure the people at the front will be gratified that you're upset on their behalf.

[Kizzy]

Oh, they're not sensitive enough for you. I'm sure the people at the front will be gratified that you're upset on their behalf.

Well I'm more respectful than the people who put them there clearly :/

[Livia]

Well I'm more respectful than the people who put them there clearly :/

LOL... right.

[Kizzy]

LOL... right.

Mock all you like, doesn't justify the rapturous response the news received however intended.

[smudgie]

Most of the applause was for the speech by Hilary Benn, well deserved in my opinion.
I think the clapping and any merriment after the result was mainly brought on by relief that the debate was over and a decision had been made. I dare say exactly the same response would have happened had the vote gone the other way, for much the same reason.
I can't see how any of the MPs can have made their decisions lightly, either way and will have had a tough time of it this last few weeks.

[Kizzy]

Most of the applause was for the speech by Hilary Benn, well deserved in my opinion.
I think the clapping and any merriment after the result was mainly brought on by relief that the debate was over and a decision had been made. I dare say exactly the same response would have happened had the vote gone the other way, for much the same reason.
I can't see how any of the MPs can have made their decisions lightly, either way and will have had a tough time of it this last few weeks.

Hilary Benn that when asked on the 15th Nov if he thought the government should extend air strikes into Syria said: ‘No.’, and then added: ‘They have to come up with an overall plan, which they have not done. I think the focus for now is finding a peaceful solution to the civil war.'?

Hmmmm...

[Northern Monkey]

The applause was probably pride in the fact that we are finally making a stand in Syria and supporting our allies in the fight against terrorism.

[Glenn.]

I loved Corbyns face when Hilary sat down. Like a petulant child.

[smudgie]

Hilary Benn that when asked on the 15th Nov if he thought the government should extend air strikes into Syria said: ‘No.’, and then added: ‘They have to come up with an overall plan, which they have not done. I think the focus for now is finding a peaceful solution to the civil war.'?

Hmmmm...

Hmmmmm yes, I would love to know what changed his mind.

[Livia]

The applause was probably pride in the fact that we are finally making a stand in Syria and supporting our allies in the fight against terrorism.

Yes. Completely agree. And not for the first time, Monkey.

[Northern Monkey]

Yes. Completely agree. And not for the first time, Monkey.

Yep us non Corbynistas are few and far between around these parts these days:laugh:

[Livia]

Hilary Benn that when asked on the 15th Nov if he thought the government should extend air strikes into Syria said: ‘No.’, and then added: ‘They have to come up with an overall plan, which they have not done. I think the focus for now is finding a peaceful solution to the civil war.'?

Hmmmm...

he said this on November 23rd...

On British military involvement, the UK is already taking action in Iraq and contributing to action in Syria through intelligence, surveillance and refuelling using RAF drones and planes.

The Government hasn’t yet come forward with a specific proposal on extending UK airstrikes against ISIL/Daesh targets in Syria despite a lot of talk in recent months. At the weekend the Prime Minister finally acknowledged the strength of the case that has been being made by Labour and the Select Committee and he told a press conference at the G20 summit in Turkey:

“I think people want to know there is a whole plan for the future of Syria, for the future of the region.

“It is perfectly right to say a few extra bombs and missiles won’t transform the situation.

“The faster we degrade and destroy ISIL, the safer we will be. But we will only be safe in the longer term if we can replace ungoverned space by ISIL with a proper Syrian government.”

If the government now has a proposal to bring forward relating to airstrikes against ISIL/Daesh in Syria then – as we have consistently said, and our position has not changed – we will consider it against the tests we have set. We need to be clear about what difference any extension of military action would make to our objective of defeating ISIL/Daesh, the nature of any intervention, its objectives and the legal basis. Any potential action must command the support of other nations in the region, including Iraq and the coalition already taking action in Syria. And, crucially, it must be part of a wider and more comprehensive strategy to end the threat they pose and the Government must seek a Security Council resolution for it.

http://www.hilarybennmp.com/syrian_airstrikes

Seems the criteria was met.

[Livia]

Yep us non Corbynistas are few and far between around these parts these days:laugh:

If the country reflected the support he gets on here I'd completely lose faith in the public. But luckily, it does not.

[Northern Monkey]

If the country reflected the support he gets on here I'd completely lose faith in the public. But luckily, it does not.

I think i would go on a very long holiday abroad.:laugh:

[Livia]

I think i would go on a very long holiday abroad.:laugh:

I'd probably come with you.... Somewhere hot with no mozzies please.

[Northern Monkey]

I'd probably come with you.... Somewhere hot with no mozzies please.

No mozzies or Islamic fundamentlists would be great.

[Kizzy]

he said this on November 23rd...

On British military involvement, the UK is already taking action in Iraq and contributing to action in Syria through intelligence, surveillance and refuelling using RAF drones and planes.

The Government hasn’t yet come forward with a specific proposal on extending UK airstrikes against ISIL/Daesh targets in Syria despite a lot of talk in recent months. At the weekend the Prime Minister finally acknowledged the strength of the case that has been being made by Labour and the Select Committee and he told a press conference at the G20 summit in Turkey:

“I think people want to know there is a whole plan for the future of Syria, for the future of the region.

“It is perfectly right to say a few extra bombs and missiles won’t transform the situation.

“The faster we degrade and destroy ISIL, the safer we will be. But we will only be safe in the longer term if we can replace ungoverned space by ISIL with a proper Syrian government.”

If the government now has a proposal to bring forward relating to airstrikes against ISIL/Daesh in Syria then – as we have consistently said, and our position has not changed – we will consider it against the tests we have set. We need to be clear about what difference any extension of military action would make to our objective of defeating ISIL/Daesh, the nature of any intervention, its objectives and the legal basis. Any potential action must command the support of other nations in the region, including Iraq and the coalition already taking action in Syria. And, crucially, it must be part of a wider and more comprehensive strategy to end the threat they pose and the Government must seek a Security Council resolution for it.

http://www.hilarybennmp.com/syrian_airstrikes

Seems the criteria was met.

Then why was this not used as a reason for airstrikes, and not shouting about people opposing being terrorist sympatisers?...

[Kizzy]

If the country reflected the support he gets on here I'd completely lose faith in the public. But luckily, it does not.

May I remind you our current govt only represents just over 36% of those who voted....not the country. I feel your frustration more than you know.

[Livia]

May I remind you our current govt only represents just over 36% of those who voted....not the country. I feel your frustration more than you know.

And may I remind you that 50% of the population couldn't be arsed to vote. You get the government you deserve.

[Livia]

I'm normally a bit of a hippy pacifist with war and things (peace and love man) but I actually feel quite a strong sense of relief about the air strikes going ahead. One of my friends is a Syrian migrant who came over a few years ago on a student visa (his family are all still in Syria) and honestly, as terrifying as it is to think that innocent people might get caught in the crossfire of the air strikes, it's unimaginably worse to know that your loved ones are at constant risk of being kidnapped/tortured/beheaded etc with NO end in sight. And that's the point of the airstrikes, to try and stop ISIS for good. If anyone, ANYONE was able to come up with a better solution then I'd be the first one to say 'cancel the air strikes' but I just don't see it. At least, not anything that would actually help Syrian people NOW. It's all about how it makes us look bad, or we might become a target, or they're not being sensitive and respectful enough about it, but none of this changes the fact that ordinary people like us are living in hell with no way out, and if this has a chance of providing them with one then surely it's worth the risk?

That's a great post Jamie. Can't imagine what it must be like for your friend with his family still in Syria. I hope more people can get out into Jordan and Turkey and that the outcome of all this is swifter than people imagine.

[Kizzy]

And may I remind you that 50% of the population couldn't be arsed to vote. You get the government you deserve.

ah well Corbyns representation on here is as unbalanced as Camerons in society.

[Jamie89]

That's a great post Jamie. Can't imagine what it must be like for your friend with his family still in Syria. I hope more people can get out into Jordan and Turkey and that the outcome of all this is swifter than people imagine.

Thanks Livia, and obviously I agree with that sentiment too :) (I deleted my post though because I realised I posted it in the wrong thread - confusing with two 'syrian airstrikes' threads running at the same time lol)

[Livia]

ah well Corbyns representation on here is as unbalanced as Camerons in society.

Conjecture.

[Livia]

Thanks Livia, and obviously I agree with that sentiment too :) (I deleted my post though because I realised I posted it in the wrong thread - confusing with two 'syrian airstrikes' threads running at the same time lol)

Ah well, wherever you posted it, it was a good, thought-provoking post.

[joeysteele]

Most of the applause was for the speech by Hilary Benn, well deserved in my opinion.
I think the clapping and any merriment after the result was mainly brought on by relief that the debate was over and a decision had been made. I dare say exactly the same response would have happened had the vote gone the other way, for much the same reason.
I can't see how any of the MPs can have made their decisions lightly, either way and will have had a tough time of it this last few weeks.

I agree with just about all you say here,of course at the risk of sounding boring :shocked: I still would have preferred a free vote for all MPs.

I think you are right,there was near all round relief a decision was at last made one way or the other.
We won't know if it was the best or right decision for a while yet although we can hope it was and is.

I myself changed my position on this at least 5 times in the last week alone.
I take no pride in the result which I would have in the end just supported,probably swayed by Hilary Benn to be perfectly honest.

Really good post from you again on this issue.

[bots]

I'm not convinced that many of the MP's actually thought about the vote in any great depth and I apply that to both sides in the debate. It was mostly a point scoring exercise at those they opposed.

I watched most of the live coverage and for me it was mostly going through the motions. The reason Hilary's speech struck such a chord was because he actually spoke with conviction and wasn't just ... this is how I have always thought so this is how I'm going to respond. That deserves a lot of credit as far as I'm concerned.

[Kizzy]

Conjecture.

Overruled!!

[DemolitionRed]

Like what?

Like listening and learning from Rojava, the only civilization within Syria that has managed to not only keep ISIS at bay but convert some fundamental followers away from ISIS. The West presently don't want to do this because they see Rojava as something good that rose from anarchy.

We need to put our western pride to one side and start arming Rojava and supporting their cause regardless of Turkey's hatred for them.

We need to stay clear of training and arming other rebel fractions on the ground because any one of these fraction groups are the potential ISIS of our future.

We need to put strict trade restrictions on Turkey and its buying of ISIS oil.
We need to prevent the Arabs funding ISIS with one hand and bombing Syria with the other.

[Livia]

Like listening and learning from Rojava, the only civilization within Syria that has managed to not only keep ISIS at bay but convert some fundamental followers away from ISIS. The West presently don't want to do this because they see Rojava as something good that rose from anarchy.

We need to put our western pride to one side and start arming Rojava and supporting their cause regardless of Turkey's hatred for them.

We need to stay clear of training and arming other rebel fractions on the ground because any one of these fraction groups are the potential ISIS of our future.

We need to put strict trade restrictions on Turkey and its buying of ISIS oil.
We need to prevent the Arabs funding ISIS with one hand and bombing Syria with the other.

Rojava is a shining example, everything IS hates. Sadly we aren't the ones who need to learn from that example. And I agree about Turkey and the oil, there needs to be a stop to that. The rest of it, I respect as your opinions, but I disagree.

[joeysteele]

Like listening and learning from Rojava, the only civilization within Syria that has managed to not only keep ISIS at bay but convert some fundamental followers away from ISIS. The West presently don't want to do this because they see Rojava as something good that rose from anarchy.

We need to put our western pride to one side and start arming Rojava and supporting their cause regardless of Turkey's hatred for them.

We need to stay clear of training and arming other rebel fractions on the ground because any one of these fraction groups are the potential ISIS of our future.

We need to put strict trade restrictions on Turkey and its buying of ISIS oil.
We need to prevent the Arabs funding ISIS with one hand and bombing Syria with the other.

I can go with all that Dem red.

[DemolitionRed]

Thanks Joey, I think the more we learn about Rojava, the more we can see a possible solution, not in the short term but in the long term. Its something that would require massive backing from the West though and sadly, we know that isn't going to happen. The consequences of us not supporting this fairly large oasis in the desert could be catastrophic for them and that would be tragic.

Livia, do you not agree that the Saudi's are playing with a double edged sword in this war?

[Kizzy]

I just can't believe the ITV 10pm news, the accusations leveled at him that yes supporters are targets for abuse due to his choice of words.... No word about the 'terrorist sympathiser comments aimed at those against airstrikes from the PM!
12 times he was asked to apologise and nothing! Pathetic, makes me sick the ridiculous double standards :(

[bots]

I just can't believe the ITV 10pm news, the accusations leveled at him that yes supporters are targets for abuse due to his choice of words.... No word about the 'terrorist sympathiser comments aimed at those against airstrikes from the PM!
12 times he was asked to apologise and nothing! Pathetic, makes me sick the ridiculous double standards :(

Its an emotive subject, and people get sucked in to things quite easily. I think a lot can be put down to pent up frustration with "the other side"

Cameron will have been aware of the pressure being put on mp's from unsavoury types which led to his outburst. I just read this on the bbc:

Campaign group Stop the War, which until recently was chaired by Mr Corbyn, said: "Stop the War condemns the whining complaints from those MPs who apparently do not like being lobbied.

"If an MP is not robust enough to withstand emails and tweets, they should really not be voting for bombing other people - those who wish to be alone with their consciences would do better to consider a life of religious contemplation.

"Stop the War will continue to hold to democratic account all those MPs who vote for war."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34993447


Personally, I hope its all stopped now, its not appropriate, but it needs action by both sides to stamp it out. We don't want extremists attaching themselves to any causes.

[MTVN]

Stop the War are an ugly little organisation and always have been

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/12/3/433773/default/v1/met-2-992x558.jpg
http://news.sky.com/story/1599503/labour-mp-gets-death-threat-over-syria-vote

[Kizzy]

Emphasis on the used to chair, meaning he did not say or was party to what was said... Not like directly accusing people of being 'terrorist sympathisers' could that not have the potential to have some targeted and abused on social media?!
Of course it could, it did on here didn't it? I felt that personally.
There is just no perspective ...It's those in Corbyns own party throwing mud and hoping some sticks too, disgusting.

[Kizzy]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/12/3/433773/default/v1/met-2-992x558.jpg
http://news.sky.com/story/1599503/labour-mp-gets-death-threat-over-syria-vote

Detract from the PMs comments and the refusal 12 times to apologise!!!!

Spin, spin, spin!!

[James]

There was a bit about IS funding on BBC news there. They said that IS got £240 million from taxation and extortion, and £67 million from selling oil. The report said the money they got from oil had declined. There was no mention about outside funding.

[Alf]

That's because he's a looney leftie and like all the other looney lefties (the majority of the country) he hates the British, British Values and British culture.

He's a terroist sympathiser like all the other lefties.

The lefties first thought after the Paris attacks was for Muslims.



Embrace everyone elses' culture, but look on the British with distain, that's his and his followers true believes. And they have those views because they think it makes them look good and makes them a good person.

They are a form of fascists.

[JoshBB]

I don't know if this has been said, but this is an ideological problem. And also Saudi Arabia pretty much endorses the same ideology as Daesh (Salafism).. the only diference is that ISIS carry out terrorist attacks whereas Saudi Arabia is silent (and does not appear to strongly condemn them).

[joeysteele]

I don't know if this has been said, but this is an ideological problem. And also Saudi Arabia pretty much endorses the same ideology as Daesh (Salafism).. the only diference is that ISIS carry out terrorist attacks whereas Saudi Arabia is silent (and does not appear to strongly condemn them).

You are correct indeed again Josh and I agree as to Saudi,I remain very suspicious of Saudi as to IS too.

[DemolitionRed]

That's because he's a looney leftie and like all the other looney lefties (the majority of the country) he hates the British, British Values and British culture.



Sorry I had to laugh at those words because your avatar is Keith Richards isn't it?

[Alf]

Sorry I had to laugh at those words because your avatar is Keith Richards isn't it?
I don't get you, I only admire keithy as a musician, other wise he's full of crap because his heads full of magic.

[Kizzy]

You got something against magic?

[DemolitionRed]

That's because he's a looney leftie and like all the other looney lefties (the majority of the country) he hates the British, British Values and British culture.

He's a terroist sympathiser like all the other lefties.

The lefties first thought after the Paris attacks was for Muslims.

Embrace everyone elses' culture, but look on the British with distain, that's his and his followers true believes. And they have those views because they think it makes them look good and makes them a good person.

They are a form of fascists.

Its true that the left can't debate with the right because the right have this abstract conception of humanity. We evolved differently and its a good job we did because humans the world over need balance.

Lefties collaborate and share more; Righties haven't developed those traits. Righties tend to be better at self preservation though its often at the expense of others around them and this is why the right see benefit recipients as 'scroungers' and the left see them mainly as people who have been failed by the system.

I agree with Stewart Mills when he says, "all Tories are not stupid but stupid people tend to be Tories."

Lefties are a form of fascism? do you want to explain that one?

[DemolitionRed]

Another thing that's really noticeable is, people who lean to the right seem to be far more easily offended than those leaning left. Perhaps we've just got thicker skins and mostly jump over personal insults that don't pertain to the topic in hand...Josh and Joey do so with such intentional disregard that I'm often envious of their self control and ability to dodge the insults and remain on topic.

[Kizzy]

That's because he's a looney leftie and like all the other looney lefties (the majority of the country) he hates the British, British Values and British culture.

He's a terroist sympathiser like all the other lefties.

The lefties first thought after the Paris attacks was for Muslims.



Embrace everyone elses' culture, but look on the British with distain, that's his and his followers true believes. And they have those views because they think it makes them look good and makes them a good person.

They are a form of fascists.
Unfair, untrue and unwarranted in equal measure.

[Johnnyuk123]

That's because he's a looney leftie and like all the other looney lefties (the majority of the country) he hates the British, British Values and British culture.

He's a terroist sympathiser like all the other lefties.

The lefties first thought after the Paris attacks was for Muslims.



Embrace everyone elses' culture, but look on the British with distain, that's his and his followers true believes. And they have those views because they think it makes them look good and makes them a good person.

They are a form of fascists.

So true! 100 % correct! :clap1::clap1::clap1:

[user104658]

Another thing that's really noticeable is, people who lean to the right seem to be far more easily offended than those leaning left. Perhaps we've just got thicker skins and mostly jump over personal insults that don't pertain to the topic in hand...Josh and Joey do so with such intentional disregard that I'm often envious of their self control and ability to dodge the insults and remain on topic.
My skin is so leftie that it isn't actually thick, it's inexplicably become absorbant, and I positively thrive on being "insulted". Delicious!

[joeysteele]

Unfair, untrue and unwarranted in equal measure.

Well said Kizzy,unbelievable the insulting generalisation that seems able to be got away with.

However if personalised insults can only be thrown,then those throwing them have already really lost the argument 'if' they ever had a valid one in the first place that is.

[user104658]

That's because he's a looney leftie and like all the other looney lefties (the majority of the country) he hates the British, British Values and British culture.

He's a terroist sympathiser like all the other lefties.

The lefties first thought after the Paris attacks was for Muslims.



Embrace everyone elses' culture, but look on the British with distain, that's his and his followers true believes. And they have those views because they think it makes them look good and makes them a good person.

They are a form of fascists.

You are mistaken sir. "Loony" Lefties hate (dislike? Hate? hmm) right wing British values and right wing British culture. The problem here is that you are too small-minded to comprehend that "your" British values are not everyone elses' British values. Why it might come across as "Britain hating" is because, sadly, the majority of British people and therefore, as a result, British politics is currently predominantly right-leaning.

Obvz.

Use your noggin before you start flapping your gums, silly boy.

[Livia]

Another thing that's really noticeable is, people who lean to the right seem to be far more easily offended than those leaning left. Perhaps we've just got thicker skins and mostly jump over personal insults that don't pertain to the topic in hand...Josh and Joey do so with such intentional disregard that I'm often envious of their self control and ability to dodge the insults and remain on topic.

Actually I think most people on here get bent out of shape from time to time. Anyway... it's not about other forum members, is it.

[Vicky.]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/the-sun-told-to-put-apology-to-jeremy-corbyn-on-front-page-a6782181.html

Front page apology from the sun...oh dear

[user104658]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/the-sun-told-to-put-apology-to-jeremy-corbyn-on-front-page-a6782181.html

Front page apology from the sun...oh dear

I look forward to the day when all of Britain's gutter press have to pay hefty automatic fines for every piece of unsubstantiated slander and propaganda they print. Theyll either have to stop, or they'll go bust pretty damn quickly.

[Scarlett.]

I think all corrections should have to be printed on the front page, its about time they were held more accountable for spreading ****.

[Kizzy]

I think all corrections should have to be printed on the front page, its about time they were held more accountable for spreading ****.

Excellent point Chewy, the accusations that there is a right wing bias to our media cannot in all seriousness be denied now. It's not in any way subtle.
I am so proud of the British sense of fair play, the rubbishing of Corbyn has gotten so overt that it's laughable.

[joeysteele]

I think all corrections should have to be printed on the front page, its about time they were held more accountable for spreading ****.

They should indeed. well said.

None of the silly fines to them either for great errors, if they refuse to do comply with decency, stop them publishing at all for a period of time.
They may then just get the message.

[arista]

{ Corbyn Challenges PM To Annual TV Debate
The Labour leader says the Government should be held to account 'throughout their period in office - not just at election time'.}

Yes JC I like your style
but its nothing you can Demand.
you can ask
but Not Waste Time Demanding,


As Dave is finishing at the End of this Term


They are staying as a Election Ploy
you can not Demand Feck All
as you are NOT in power

http://news.sky.com/story/1613578/corbyn-challenges-pm-to-annual-tv-debate

Sign Of The Times

[arista]

"Why it might come across as "Britain hating" is because, sadly,
the majority of British people and therefore, as a result,
British politics is currently predominantly right-leaning."


Yes TS (his post is a page back)
because we want to Evolve

We do not need Unions


We need more AsdaWalmarts



Feel The Force

[Kizzy]

"Why it might come across as "Britain hating" is because, sadly,
the majority of British people and therefore, as a result,
British politics is currently predominantly right-leaning."


Yes TS (his post is a page back)
because we want to Evolve

We do not need Unions


We need more AsdaWalmarts





There are more right wing influences is all imo, if most thought about what benefited themselves, their families and their communities then that would change pdq I'd say.

Serious question, what is a viable alternative. what would protect the rights of workers in the UK if not the unions?
Feel The Force

[arista]

[Serious question, what is a viable alternative. what would protect the rights of workers in the UK if not the unions?
Feel The Force ]


Every AsdaWalmart to have Suggestion Box in
staff room
That Data sent to USA Head Office.

Results Print Out Printed
in Very Large Print
on notice board
that Print out is not to photographed
under Legal Copyright
© 2016 AsdaWalmart. All Rights Reserved

Manager of Each store
offering free consultation for any staff
in there working time
so they are paid to ask the manager to improve a section

All data will be stored
and a new Staff arrangement - that many of them prefer
is then set up.


No Unions Needed

[Kizzy]

[Serious question, what is a viable alternative. what would protect the rights of workers in the UK if not the unions?
Feel The Force ]


Every AsdaWalmart to have Suggestion Box in
staff room
That Data sent to USA Head Office.

Results Print Out Printed
in Very Large Print
on notice board
that Print out is not to photographed
under Legal Copyright
© 2016 AsdaWalmart. All Rights Reserved

Manager of Each store
offering free consultation for any staff
in there working time
so they are paid to ask the manager to improve a section

All data will be stored
and a new Staff arrangement - that many of them prefer
is then set up.


No Unions Needed

So that is your suggestion for retail, what of industry and service organisations?

[arista]

So that is your suggestion for retail, what of industry and service organisations?


I have Many Other Bigger Plans
but I can Not post those Online
as they are Under Debate in Private.


I would love to do another thread
on The Industry
without Unions
but I have been advised that as I have submitted that
it can not go online


That AsdaWalmart
can go online
as it not in Practice at this time.



Now all this is on a JC thread
as I like him
I love how he said Industry.


So If I had time to talk to JC or his MANAGER son
I would spare them some time.

And Warn them
that If a Business is Positive
and allows Open Feedback to Improve
then we do not need Corrupt Unions.


Evolution Is here Kizzy

[arista]

I would also show this chap to JC
as he has no time for any Unions
and he is Far Far younger than me
http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=294069

[Kizzy]

I have Many Other Bigger Plans
but I can Not post those Online
as they are Under Debate in Private.


I would love to do another thread
on The Industry
without Unions
but I have been advised that as I have submitted that
it can not go online


That AsdaWalmart
can go online
as it not in Practice at this time.



Now all this is on a JC thread
as I like him
I love how he said Industry.


So If I had time to talk to JC or his MANAGER son
I would spare them some time.

And Warn them
that If a Business is Positive
and allows Open Feedback to Improve
then we do not need Corrupt Unions.


Evolution Is here Kizzy

Removal of fought for workers rights is regressive... period.

[joeysteele]

The ASDA I use and I expect other ASDA stores are the same,have all the staff on 16 hour contracts, the staff I hear talking as I go round are far from happy staff and most haven't a clue if they will ever get many weeks with over that 16 hours work.

For me, the last thing we need are more stores that exploit peoples working lives like this, because they,the staff on 16 hours contracts, cannot get another job in addition. Since were Asda to need any of those staff quickly and it could be as little as a few hours notice given,they 'have' to be available to come into work and to be contacted easily too.
A bad way to expect people to work in my view.

As for Corbyn wanting annual debates,I think it a good thing but it won't happen with this PM for sure.
He says he is held to account in PMQs every week, what rubbish, he never answers a question there,he asks more than he answers and is even worse than Gordon Brown ever was in this farce of PMQs.

[arista]

Removal of fought for workers rights is regressive... period.


No one is taking workers rights away.


We are taking the Corrupt Unions away



Its that simple

[arista]

"more stores that exploit peoples working lives like this, "

You are out of you Depth, Joey

We Survey all workers, in private.
They prefer a Manager of each store
helping them get the best job they can do.

You already in a AsdaWalmart
shopping
we only want the staff to be better.
And with our help , they will.

and whats so great Joey
and No Corrupt Unions are used.

Evolution

Life In The City

[joeysteele]

"more stores that exploit peoples working lives like this, "

You are out of you Depth, Joey

We Survey all workers, in private.
They prefer a Manager of each store
helping them get the best job they can do.

You already in a AsdaWalmart
shopping
we only want the staff to be better.
And with our help , they will.

and whats so great Joey
and No Corrupt Unions are used.

Evolution

Life In The City

Really, in the ASDA store I go to I find very few staff who are happy at all, the store is understaffed,I have myself pulled up supervisors for the way they talk to the staff as if they are rubbish.
I have been told by checkout operators they should have had a break an hour ago and are still waiting.

It is a disgrace that a company only offers a guaranteed 16 hours a week work and that then those employed have to be able to be easily contacted in case they are needed at even very short notice.
So cannot even get more hours in employment elsewhere in addition.

Out of my depth, I think not, that is pathetic and it is time there was some clout to ensure people get fair contracted hours and are treated with more respect in the workplace too.
As I say, using this ASDA store a lot,I would be lucky to find a quarter at best of the staff happy being there.

If that is your vision of a good working future for people then that's fine but it is certainly not mine and most of the staff were on far more contracted hours until a couple of years ago when new contracts brought in the 16 hour gauranteed hours only scheme.

It is not just ASDA however, other Stores operate this too.
Not acceptable in my view and not acceptable to stop them having a 2nd job elsewhere.
It is really time these contracts were looked at and some legislation put in place to assist workers affected by them too.

Evolution you term it, exploitation more like for me, and of course people would prefer a manager and the support to do the job they are best at.
They also would like more than just a guaranteed 16 hours a week and if not possible to, then be permitted to be not penalised for taking on a 2nd job either.
'If' they can even get one that is.

How has this thread however which should be about Corbyns views on Syrian air strikes and his leadership gone into employment and Asda, none of which has anything to do with Corbyn at all at this moment in time.

the debate issue he raised is valid because the Syrian air strikes would be part of the debates probably if they ever came about.

[bots]

Whether we need unions or legislation or some other mechanism to protect workers rights is neither here nor there. Workers rights have been significantly eroded since the 80's and no government; labour or conservative have done anything about it

The unions were too strong in the 70's, I don't think anyone would dispute that with honesty, but the pendulum has swung much too far in the other direction since then.

Its all very well to say that informal mechanisms are better or "more fluffy" but nothing without legal force or bite is good enough or effective enough to truly look after the rights of the individual. For those that say they are all right now, just wait, you never know when you will need the protection, and you can't rely on a boss being nice then.

I would support any sensible legislation that truly was looking after the rights of the individual employee.

[joeysteele]

Whether we need unions or legislation or some other mechanism to protect workers rights is neither here nor there. Workers rights have been significantly eroded since the 80's and no government; labour or conservative have done anything about it

The unions were too strong in the 70's, I don't think anyone would dispute that with honesty, but the pendulum has swung much too far in the other direction since then.

Its all very well to say that informal mechanisms are better or "more fluffy" but nothing without legal force or bite is good enough or effective enough to truly look after the rights of the individual. For those that say they are all right now, just wait, you never know when you will need the protection, and you can't rely on a boss being nice then.

I would support any sensible legislation that truly was looking after the rights of the individual employee.

I am in total agreement,start to finish,with the post above and especially the bit in bold.

[arista]

[Evolution you term it, exploitation more
like for me, and of course people would
prefer a manager and the support to do
the job they are best at.
They also would like more than just
a guaranteed 16 hours a week and
if not possible to, then be permitted
to be not penalised for taking
on a 2nd job either.
'If' they can even get one that is.]


yes it is Evolution
as it works
You are a Grafter or Slacker.

You are out of your depth
as you do not know the places that have this working well.

At this time
those places can not go online

[kirklancaster]

Whether we need unions or legislation or some other mechanism to protect workers rights is neither here nor there. Workers rights have been significantly eroded since the 80's and no government; labour or conservative have done anything about it

The unions were too strong in the 70's, I don't think anyone would dispute that with honesty, but the pendulum has swung much too far in the other direction since then.

Its all very well to say that informal mechanisms are better or "more fluffy" but nothing without legal force or bite is good enough or effective enough to truly look after the rights of the individual. For those that say they are all right now, just wait, you never know when you will need the protection, and you can't rely on a boss being nice then.

I would support any sensible legislation that truly was looking after the rights of the individual employee.

:clap1::clap1::clap1: I was going to post a similar view BOTS, but you have expressed it better anyway.

The unions WERE hi-jacked by self-serving militants - Derek Hatton is a reprehensible example - and, once again, a moderate majority remained apathetically silent while these subversives virtually ruined the UK.

Now - as you succinctly say - 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way', and some workers are being defecated upon.

Great Post Bots.

[joeysteele]

[Evolution you term it, exploitation more
like for me, and of course people would
prefer a manager and the support to do
the job they are best at.
They also would like more than just
a guaranteed 16 hours a week and
if not possible to, then be permitted
to be not penalised for taking
on a 2nd job either.
'If' they can even get one that is.]


yes it is Evolution
as it works
You are a Grafter or Slacker.

You are out of your depth
as you do not know the places that have this working well.

At this time
those places can not go online

Anything can appear to work well on the surface and hide the discontent underneath arista.

The ASDA store I go to appears to work very well,it is only because I regularly go in there and get to talk to staff, (which is discouraged by the management by the way, they do not like the staff engaging long with customers at all),that I have been able to lean their grievances and for many their real dislike as to working there.

Many do their jobs to the best of their ability but hate almost every minute they are there.
I know you are a strong advocate for ASDA but for me they are one of the last companies I would herald as being anything noteworthy as to employers.

I am not someone who just takes things as they appear on the surface, I like to dig a little deeper to see what lurks underneath too.
Often that is where the real truth lies too,far different from the presented glossy picture fronting issues.

[arista]

"The ASDA store I go to appears to work very well"


You know the numbers?

Stop all this Lurking underneath talk

[joeysteele]

"The ASDA store I go to appears to work very well"


You know the numbers?

Stop all this Lurking underneath talk

With respect I will stop nothing of the sort,and you have no right to tell me to do so either,so kindly refrain from doing so.

I hear great numbers of the staff moaning as to not enough staff,moaning at their lack of hours and moaning at how they are spoken to and treated when at work.

Numbers are not necessary and unobtainable anyway since ASDA would never independently 'ALLOW' their staff to be interviewed without some of what they say undirected.
Talk to them as they leave or when you come across them when not at work, then even you may likely find the same large discontent I have been able to find just by talking to and being interested in them as people.

[arista]

"anyway since ASDA would never independently 'ALLOW'"

Of course ,
They are a growing Industry

[user104658]

Arista we're talking about the prosperity, health and happiness of the employees not the businesses so the figures and numbers are really irrelevant. No one is disputing that a company can thrive whilst treating their boots-on-the-ground staff like dirt. Pretty much every single one of the "big companies" do it. ASDA is hardly a glowing example. There's a large ASDA a few minutes walk from my shop, meaning that I have quite a few ASDA employees who I see and talk to most days. They generally express feeling abused, powerless and anxious in their jobs. Maybe it works fine for ASDA's profit margins but that's entirely irrelevant.

Also, it's not just their minimum wage staff. As an anecdote, about a year ago I had a run-in in that ASDA with one of the duty managers. It was over something petty, but it was handled very badly, as far as I can tell based purely on bad policy. I felt that the woman was dismissive and rude, to be honest. About a month later, I was getting a coffee at the café near my work (part of a small independent chain in the local area) and the same woman was working there as a manager. She actually talked to me and apologised, said that the incident had actually lead to her having a massive disagreement with her bosses (about how much their hands are tied basically) and eventually deciding to leave, which she said was the best decision she had ever made. She looked happy, relaxed and upbeat in her new job. When I encountered her at ASDA she looked tired, stressed and irritable. THAT is the difference. People should be able to enjoy their work, it should not be endless pressure and stress UNLESS the pay being offered reflects taking on that level of stress. Which in these sorts of roles, it never does.

We're in a sad situation at the moment where people feel "lucky" to "have any job" and don't feel confident that they can find another if they leave their current one. So upper management can treat people absolutely abysmally, slowly eroding the perks, adding more work and more pressure without increasing pay, and most will just take it on the chin, rather than walking out the door, which would often be totally justified.

[Kizzy]

[Evolution you term it, exploitation more
like for me, and of course people would
prefer a manager and the support to do
the job they are best at.
They also would like more than just
a guaranteed 16 hours a week and
if not possible to, then be permitted
to be not penalised for taking
on a 2nd job either.
'If' they can even get one that is.]


yes it is Evolution
as it works
You are a Grafter or Slacker.

You are out of your depth
as you do not know the places that have this working well.

At this time
those places can not go online

How does language like this relate to a discussion about the relevance of unions, are those in unions slackers or grafters?

[Kizzy]

'During the 1860s, punitive provisions were extended by judicial interpretation, leading to the imprisonment of union officials who led strikes or issued verbal calls challenging an employer's hiring practices such as only using non-union workers. A revised Master and Servant Act was passed in 1867, which supposedly limited imprisonment to "aggravated" breaches of contract (where injury to persons or property was likely to result), but it was clear that only workers were subject to its provisions. Imprisonment, even for non-aggravated breaches of contract, continued when working people failed to comply with court orders for specific performance or for non-payment of monetary damages and fines.[1]

Between 1858 and 1875 on average 10,000 prosecutions a year took place under the Act in Britain. Ernest Jones, a barrister, estimated that, "[I]n one year alone, 1864, the last return given, under the Master and Servants Act, 10,246 working men were imprisoned at the suit of their masters — not one master at the suit of the men!"[2] There is some evidence, however, that this may not universally have been the case; at least one scholar has shown that local courts enforced causes of action in the early-to-mid-19th century against masters as well, in at least some instances, albeit in Canada'

'Summary of the Working Time Directive (Limitation) Bill 2015-16

A Bill to limit the application of the EU Working Time Directive; and for connected purposes.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_and_Servant_Act

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2015-16/workingtimedirectivelimitation.html

A quick look at bills before parliament and you wonder, are the erosion of the unions and government proposals signaling a return to the 19th century?

[Alf]

You are mistaken sir. "Loony" Lefties hate (dislike? Hate? hmm) right wing British values and right wing British culture. The problem here is that you are too small-minded to comprehend that "your" British values are not everyone elses' British values. Why it might come across as "Britain hating" is because, sadly, the majority of British people and therefore, as a result, British politics is currently predominantly right-leaning.

Obvz.

Use your noggin before you start flapping your gums, silly boy.
Why don't you go and fight for the human rights of Peter Sutcliffe and his kind, so that they can live the rest of his lives with a roof over their heads, no wories about rent, bills, having to go out to work or to feed and clothe themselves, all paid for by the British taxpayer.

While pensioners who have paid into the system all their lives have to pay over the odds for a care home.

That's the sort of priority's the looney left stand for, the human rights of monsters.

That money saved by putting them down could come in handy and most sane humans would be happy to see them exicuted.

[arista]

"They generally express feeling abused, powerless and anxious in their jobs."


Yes its a Tough Market place.

But those people / workers
are the ones that will not get
abused with The Manager dealing with them
under new system.


Stay Positive.

The Manager can replace Corrupt unions

[arista]

How does language like this relate to a discussion about the relevance of unions, are those in unions slackers or grafters?



All these posts should have been in my JC thread
not the Syria thread

There is not staff that could move all these now


i am sorry.

[bots]

"They generally express feeling abused, powerless and anxious in their jobs."


Yes its a Tough Market place.

But those people / workers
are the ones that will not get
abused with The Manager dealing with them
under new system.


Stay Positive.

The Manager can replace Corrupt unions

I don't know where you get your assumptions from Arista. Its not about being positive or negative, its not about people who work hard or those who don't. Its about every individuals right to be treated with respect, dignity and fairness. In today's working environment it is becoming less and less the norm.

Anyway, this thread has now gone ridiculously off topic :laugh:

[arista]

I don't know where you get your assumptions from Arista. Its not about being positive or negative, its not about people who work hard or those who don't. Its about every individuals right to be treated with respect, dignity and fairness. In today's working environment it is becoming less and less the norm.

Anyway, this thread has now gone ridiculously off topic :laugh:


"every individuals right to be treated with respect, "


So long they are not creating a problem
I agree with you.

all Data goes into a Central Computer

Eventually
Robots will serve you.
(every 2 robots will have "one" human
back up)
Once fully tested in the Far East
we will bring the Next Phase in.

Self Service Tills will be for the Young
and any old that are relaxed