To agree with Corbyn on response after Paris attacks?

[Gisforgustywinds]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34886321.

I am no expert but surely simply bombing Syria is not going to reduce the likelihood of terrors attacks in the UK?

Also, why not remove those who have travelled to Syria to fight with IS from the UK? Would this even be possible?

That wasn't a link to justify my stance, at all.
I've repeatedly said I'm more than willing to change my stance, if anyone will give me a way in which we can stop them.
Not a way to leave everyone else at, and make sure we are not targeted, but a way to stop them.
Any ideas?

Timri do you really really think bombing will stop them though? And stop anyone else picking up the reins of Islamic fundamentalist? And sort this once and for all because I can't see that.
What happens after you've bombed them? Work it through for me because I can't see where the peace bit comes in after that.

Ubik1 - Corbyn has argued for negotiation to end the civil war in Syria, which will, in turn weaken ISIS.

7 days- I bit the Christians and the Gays and any other non Islamic group being persecuted would rather something be done about Isis. They are not going to worry about ISIS being bombed.

We are talking about people here who are fanatics sold on some obscure version of their religion and creating chaos and acts of terror in the name of their religion. Even when those countries weren't being bombed they still existed, killing their fellow Muslims because they are weren't Shia or Sunni etc. They see everyone else who doesn't follow their rule/religion as the enemy so imo even if we hadn't bombed any country it would of made sod all difference. We haven't even bombed Syria but you can be sure they are still planning to attack the UK.

Spectre we're bombing ISIS in Iraq though. And they don't see the distinction.

Giddy I'm not sure why you're coming up with this strawman argument, you're purposefully trying to misrepresent what I'm saying, by asking me to justify a stance I never said that I had.
Please find me ONE example of where I've said bombing will bring peace. When you've done that I'll happily answer your question.

My point from the beginning wasn't that bombing them would bring peace, was it?
It was asking for an alternative that would stop them.
Not an alternative that would just get us out of their line of fire.
It seems you're unable to give me one, hence why you're trying to attach to me a point of view I never said I had

Majestic- what you are saying is that Corbyn wants to negotiate with Terrorists whose ideals will not allow them to consider anything other than Sharia law. How the hell is that ever going to work?

Obviously my posts have been ignored, feel free to go back and read them if you want.

I'm generally along the same stance as you, but using an article from the express that is citing the sodding anonymous without seeing the general tub thumping nature, is being the exact stereotypical argument as to why there is apprehension.

Corbyn has argued for negotiation

Tell us what is Isis wanting negotiation on, are you for an effective ethnic cleanse of areas as long as it doesn't reach your doorstep?

Timri

In the news section on the thread about Muslims, someone has written something very funny about how frustrating it must be for ISIS to keep being told by the Left, that actually religion isn't the reason they are killing people and trying to bring about the Apocalypse.

Giddy there has been so much confusion and mix of aims with all the different factions fighting ISIS, but now, the world seems far more focused on getting rid of ISIS.

Once a big terrorist atrocity like Paris happens, it gives impetus to other cells and plans and one wolves and all the rest. It galvanizes them and gives them hope. The established caliphate gives them something to fight for, they are achieving their aims, they get stronger, and richer all the time. Knowing The caliphate is there it gives them all strength and people have been leaving Europe to go there. Its their paradise, the promised land....

How on earth can it be allowed to flourish, the longer its there, un touched and growing stronger, the stronger the pull and reason for all the decided and un decided Jihadis to fight for it.

And within the promised land - any google of Racca will show you whats going on there.

I'm not sure why you're so angry with me about this. I'm not trying to misrepresent you and I'm sorry if it seems that way. The argument on this thread seems to be bomb/not bomb as those are the options on the table. If you don't agree with either then what do you suggest? Negotiation is the only route - probably with President Assad, hence my first comments on this thread. We swallow our dislike of the Chinese regime for trade so why can't we swallow our dislike of Assad for peace.
Is there a third way of not bombing and not negotiating? Do we bomb and then hope Assad will negotiate because we've bombed his enemies? Or do we talk to him and get concessions before we target his enemies?

What do you think will 'stop' them?

Having said that, I think Corybn is a good balance to have at the moment.

I am much happier at this moment in time having him in opposition than power hungry slavering Blair.

Its good to have checks and balances, and this is what democracy is all about.

Its good to hear another view and another side.

giddy

they are bombing the oil - the trucks, cutting off major supply routes for slaves, arms and drugs and money.

training camps, HQ and so on.

They are communicating and trying to co ordinate with innocent civilians to get out of the way when they do it.

Ultimately the only way out of all of this mess is to get education in and stopping the spread of this whabbism. The very nature of Islam makes this really really tricky though. Its convoluted and comes in on itself.

Fair enough but still irrespective of bombing in Iraq it wouldn't of changed the facts that they would still see us as the enemy. I remember pre-Iraq at my university you had Muslim leaders coming in and trying to preach to fellow Muslims about joining the cause and act against the west.

I remember pre-Iraq at my university you had Muslim leaders coming in and trying to preach to fellow Muslims about joining the cause and act against the west

Really, well this is another area that needs serious action.

A long long time ago our politics proff said - the area of biggest worry ( back in the 90's) was radical islamics in unis, taking over student unions etc.

We have let this hate be spoken on our streets and we stood by and watched.

It really is barn door close situation.

www.economist.com/news/britain/21647303-why-britains-universities-produce-so-many-radical-islamists-studying-jihad

Mrs May had wanted to order universities to vet all outside speakers for extremist views; student unions would have had to tell the authorities who was coming in advance. That struck the House of Lords, the Liberal Democrats and several Conservative ministers as intolerably illiberal, and the home secretary backed down. Yet she has a point.

Almost every day newspapers carry stories about British Muslims who have disappeared, presumed en route for Syria and the welcoming arms of Islamic State. These new recruits are often students. Mohammed Emwazi, who has been named as the hooded “Jihadi John”, studied at the University of Westminster. Similarly, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who tried to blow up a Detroit-bound jet in 2009, studied at University College London. Asif Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, who tried to bomb a bar in Tel Aviv in 2003, were at King’s College London. Omar Sheikh, who murdered the journalist Daniel Pearl in Pakistan in 2002, attended the London School of Economics for a spell.

I think negotiation is a long term strategy - but in the meantime?

I was surprised to learn that Isis takes in more than $1M per day in extortion and taxation.

Giddy I'm not especially angry with you.
I don't know what will stop them.
That's kind of my whole point, I'm asking people to give me any way to do so.
It's just at the moment, to me bombing is the least worst option.
I cannot compute doing nothing. As I've said, it reeks of 'I'm alright Jack, never mind what they're doing to the people in the ME, as long as they're not doing it to US'
Negotiation would be absolutely wonderful. But how do you negotiate with religious fanatics who are hell bent on killing all the non believers?
They want to create a caliphate, something that was prophesied in the Qu'ran. They believe that they are fulfilling their destinies. This is a holy war to them and they believe the end justifies any means.
I can't imagine how any negotiations would work? How would they go?
I can't imagine them agreeing to a semi-caliphate to be honest. It seems to be pretty all or nothing with this lot.
And I'm pretty sure they said that they would behead anyone who tried to negotiate with them.

Limbo
'In the news section on the thread about Muslims, someone has written something very funny about how frustrating it must be for ISIS to keep being told by the Left, that actually religion isn't the reason they are killing people and trying to bring about the Apocalypse'

Yes, quite.

There is no stopping them.

Timri I certainly don't think those of us arguing against the bombing are doing it from the I'm Alright Jack view. In my case it's almost the reverse and I think this is going to get worse and worse and we need to try a different way of fixing it. We need to open a dialogue and work with the surrounding parties to strangle ISIS. To push them into a hole without giving them a stick to beat the West. We didn't beat the IRA. We negotiated a peace.
To me bombing is the least good option.

Yanbu. Where is the action against banks - follow the money.

Bombing people who proudly claim that they love death as much as we love life isn't going to do any good at all.

Giddy - I don't think you quite get it, they don't want peace they want a caliphate world. They will do what it takes to achieve that - you cannot negotiate peace with these people. They aren't content with just one country being caliphate. What would you negotiate exactly?

We swallow our dislike of the Chinese regime for trade so why can't we swallow our dislike of Assad for peace

It's not comparable to China, because there WASN'T peace, was there?
Assad had people gunned down for protesting about teenagers being tortured over a bit of graffiti.
This started a full blown rebellion.
Our government may have help arm the rebellion, which was subsequently taken over by ISIS, but they didn't start the rebellion did they?