Reply With QuoteYou have long departed from the sensible, so no.
Hall Of Fame
Nothing sensible to add...?Originally Posted by BlueAdder
Give him a coconut.
Hall Of Fame
You have long departed from the sensible, so no.
Hall Of Fame
Hmmm, is that because I disagree with your views? Well luckily for our nation The Prime Minister and the majority of the House of Commons shares my view. Now my thoughts are with our brave RAF crews who are risking their lives for our security....lefties n all!
Hall Of Fame
Fiddler, a couple of things. My 'give him a coconut' was not in any way disparaging or insulting. It's an FF thing where a coconut is awarded to anyone that starts a 100 post thread. Mine was Post 100.
Back to our disagreement. I watched nearly all 100 hours of the HoC debate and listened carefully to the arguments. I came down on the No side despite many excellent speeches from the Yes campaign. Significant that the speech of the day, encouraging a Yes vote was from one of your 'loonie and spineless lefties'. I am persuaded by the argument that we at home are put in more danger by bombing in Syria.
The debate in the HoC was conducted in respectful language and nobody used words like 'barbaric animals' or 'murderous scum' which seem a main ingrediant of your argument. In Post 89 I invited you to offer a counter argument to the points made by the blogger in an earlier post. This you chose to ignore so at that point I lost interest in your rant.
Now we have commenced bombing I
Hall Of Fame
I think the money spent on increasing the scope of the air war could better be spent on beefing up our intelligence capability and increasing security at home which is subject to swingeing cuts by our "patriotic" leaders.
As for the coalition against Daesh, I was under the impression that they were being armed and financed by Saudi and Qatar, and tacitly supported by Turkey through their opposition to Basher Assad and their brokering of illicit oil sales ?PF has left me bemused and confused as well.
Is it unpatriotic, appeasement and worthy of accusations of being a "terrorist sympathiser" to question the reasons, motives and consequences for further foreign military involvement ? No it isn't.
I hope our flyers stay safe too but I'm mindful of the thousands more certain innocent victims of their actions, children mostly, just like our's.
Hall Of Fame
kernow
From what I understand from the media is :
The Saudis are funding 'Al Nusra and Al Quida rebels,(not ISIS), who are Sunnis,the Saudis are actually against the Shia. They have had enough of their Islamic brand. In northern Iraq,with the bombing of Shia shrines and mosques,market places etc. Then when the some of the Shia population fled ,in came ISIS.
Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the UK has attacked Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn for suggesting the kingdom supports Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL).
Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz al Saud described comments made by Corbyn and former Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown as “distortion” and “an insult” to the Saudi Arabian government.
The Labour leader said on Tuesday there were several “very big questions” around the rise of IS which remained unanswered, such as who is providing financial aid to the group.
Corbyn suggested Saudi Arabia may be involved in funding IS, a theory shared by many jou
Posting Permissions