In tears

[G1veMeStrength]

Fucking parliament. You utter bastards. You're going to kill people and it won't stop anything.

No I will not supply a link, it would show exactly where I live.

One poll was 457 people, I cannot find numbers for the other.

Let's get back to the fact that MPs have voted in direct contrast to their electorate's wishes. And if the electorate wished them to vote yes, they also had every opportunity to email. Or perhaps they are lazy emailers as well as thinkers. Always simpler to take the easy option.

Didn't give a shit is unsourced

As was "hospitalS"

The only way to know the electorate's wishes is a secret ballot.

Ah yes, a rogue "s"
Sorry about that.
Anyone who thinks that the US govt cares about "collateral damage" is delusional.

Disaffected young men?

Elendon there's nothing in calling them that which diminished the horror that they've caused and are planning to cause. But I think it's true - some little shit with BO who can't talk to girls and can't be arsed to make something of himself at home can bugger off and become a Big Man, get the power to do whatever he likes, rape as many women as he likes, murder them afterwards, behave in real life as if he's still playing Call of Duty in his sweaty bedroom. I think it helps us to remember (and point out to other potential recruits) that murdering people doesn't make you a warrior, and that you will forever be just that little shit with BO who is making nothing of himself except an attempt to be cowardly murdering big shit.

I don't disagree that their view of collateral damage is not in line with most of our own views of collateral damage.

But you deliberately implied that this has happened multiple times. It hasn't, it's war, as in life mistakes happen, particularly when you are travelling at Mach 3 and potentially under ground fire.

Nobody is deliberately targeting aid workers and msf, except ISIS

To those talking about NI there is a fundamental misunderstanding. Peace didn't just come about through the peace talks, in fact other circumstances forced the hands of the parties involved:

1. funding (comparatively) dried up, especially for the previously well-funded republican paramilitary groups; domestic terrorism in the USA and actions like the Warrington bomb (and to an extent the Brighton bombing) in England made some of the Boston/ NY funders think twice about what they were supporting in NI

1. enough of the people had fecking had enough and weren't willing to live like that any more

1. intelligence and improved cross-border co-operation delivered some good results - there had been major finds of arms caches etc, reducing the supply of armaments that were harder to replace given the drop in funding noted in 1 above, and crackdowns on smuggling etc further disrupted the flow of funds

1. some of the leaders of the paramilitaries realised the war would never be won, especially given 1, 2 and 3 above - and decided dialog gave them a better chance of exerting power

1. over a long period of time, often-frustrating discussions were held with all parties until eventually A peace was agreed. Not perfect, but enough to change people's lives.

Comparison with the situation in Syria/ Iraq:

1. oil fields and trade in antiquities etc give them an ongoing supply of funds, unless disrupted. State funders are impervious to the suffering of others and (so far) political pressure

1. the people in those areas of Iraq and Syria don't have the freedom/ power to oppose Da'esh

1. we don't know what intelligence exists and what has been prevented to date (in the region, we know about the threats in the UK) but the British authorities claim to hit static, strategic targets. They say 400 sorties in Iraq have resulted in no civilian casualties. Arguably some of the other partners can't say the same. Russia is hitting anti-Assad forces as much/ more than anything else so someone needs to be taking out the infrastructure in a way designed to minimise casualties

1. Da'esh are not interested in talking.

1. As in NI, we can't wait for the parties involved to agree politically before taking steps that will help wrt 1, 2, 3 above.

The US dept of defence called the Geneva convention "quaint" before the Iraq war.
That tells me all I need to know.

And I did not "deliberately imply"
I added an s mistake!
Sorry am on iPad.

Stratter5 "One poll was 457 people"

Thank you for your reply and I can understand why you wouldn't want to put a direct link.

Most Parliamentary constituencies have about 55,000 (and I'm being generous here) on their electorate roll.

Need I say more?

Stratter, you already stated where you live.

Once again. I support the bombings, but I've not emailed my MP, because I'm a very marginal "yes" as are many of the yes people. It's a dammed if we do dammed if we don't and its a horrible

" No"people are going to email because it's a hugely emotive issue and their minds are made up that one civilian casualty is one too many.

Your unsourced, anecdotal claim that 99% of the emails to MPs are against the bombing is at best heresay. Additionally your local paper survey are not reflective of the electorate as a whole.

I'm not a lazy thinker, I watched every second of the debate yesterday, and largely came to my view based on that. Emailing my MP would have been a little late given she was walking to the ballot box. I will email today because no doubt her inbox is packed with threats and she might want to see some support locally.

Well thats exactly it, there are no exact comparisons, we have never had a situation identical to this.

But fyi the first person to try to make a comparison was on the pro-bombing side (scatteroflight 22.57), so why should the anti-bomb side not respond with their own close-as-possible comparisons?

The MPs don't care.
They are in power now.
What can we do?
I have e mailed my MP, am all over Twitter, am signing petitions....but I'm asking myself today why I bother.
MPs are bleating that they are being criticised for their actions....well, yes!
Ken livingstone is talking about local parties deselecting their MPs.

BTW I stopped voting Labour because of the Iraq war as it was completely obvious it was wrong on every level and would bring nothing but instability, violence and death to the region and the wider world. Seeing Blair et al continuing to justify it still makes my blood boil.

So I'm not a war-monger, thanks - but disrupting infrastructure through targeted bombing that hits static targets away from civilian areas AT THIS POINT makes a lot of sense.

Let's leave the semantics now badders, despite you correcting one part of your post immidiately you chose not to correct the S.

I'm not dismissing the point, it's a valid one and proves that no matter how technology has evolved since ww2, these bombs aren't failsafe and saying "no way civilians can get hurt these days" is wrong.

Beyond I was not targeting my post at any one side/person; hopefully it helps everyone to have a bit of a reality check.

Speaking of which, we may want to remember that there was widespread public opposition to entering WW2 as we didn't want Hitler to come for us next.

Troels you cannot vote Labour if you live in Northern Ireland.

And terrorism in Northern Ireland has no comparison. Firstly there were two factions. Protestant and Catholic. UDA and IRA. The former were imprisoned as terrorists in H Block. The UDA received a lot of money from the USA as well. They killed as many innocent targets as the IRA as well. The UDA did this in Northern Ireland, though there are questions as to their bombing tactics, i.e. Birmingham.

Elendon: 1 I supported Labour while growing up in NI and voted for Labour when I moved to the 'mainland'. Hope that clarifies to your satisfaction.

1. Some people (not limited to MN) have used the example of NI to ask why we can't just talk to resolve the Da'esh problem. It's a fallacy, as outlined above.

I lived the reality of the troubles and am well versed in what went on, thanks. I am all equal opportunity when it comes to despising paramilitaries on both sides and those who financed/supported them. However it is a fact that republican paramilitary groups were a) larger and b) better funded, partly as a result of a) and the changing sentiment in the USA towards funding them was a major factor in forcing that particular group to the table.

And much though wiki is imperfect you might want to look at the stats here

It's fine to be upset over this. Just as its fine not to be. To be honest, I don't really give a toss but I won't slag off others who do. It's something happening on the other side of the world (at least at the moment)

I don't have an opinion either way because I haven't seen the information that the Govt and security people have seen. I assume some of you have, as you seem to know what we should or shouldn't do.

It's a done deal. It's happening and

Troels good to establish common ground.

I grew up in Northern Ireland too, from a Catholic perspective. We had to flee our five bedroomed detached house because of a bomb scare. Our family home was subject to a bomb several times, and we didn't live in Belfast either. I did vote Labour in Northern Ireland because I voted for the SDLP - Social Democratic and Labour Party.

I lived in the Republic of Ireland and campaigned for Divorce and Abortion rights. And voted and joined the Labour Party in Ireland then as well. It's an international institution.

Then I moved to England/UK. I've been a Labour Councillor in a very Conservative constituency.

Beautifully put, WhirlyTwos

Ha Elendon, I never voted for the party(ies) in NI you might assume In fact we may well have been involved in the same anti-sectarian campaign back in the day if you're as much of a gimmer as me....

I can also empathise with living through it - knew people bereaved/hurt/ killed on both sides by both sides and was in Belfast when a bomb went off once or twice, but was lucky enough not to be close enough to be hurt. It was crap and it pisses me off that people across the world still have to live through similar.

I've certainly not voted Tory, but equally I'm a long, long, way away from going back to Labour. Never thought that would happen.

No I didn't state where I live. Our local papers are local. To link to the other one would link to exactly where I live, and I've put enough detail about me to be fairly easily identified from it.

It doesn't take every voter to take part in a poll to get a good idea of grass root feeling. I don't know anyone who supported bombing Syria. Then again, I don't know anyone who voted (or will admit to voting) for the Conservatives. Then again, it was hardly a landslide victory, and frankly I don't think they should be in government. But that's a whole new contentious thread.

I'm very much of the opinion that MPs should be honour bound to listen to their electorate, and vote according to their wishes.

I think it was the other thread on this I quoted Burke on.

'Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.'

If they were bound to follow the wishes of the electorate directly we'd still have capital punishment.