How will you vote?

[Postie45]

Attacker was of Libyan descent. And you think the fact that the UK invaded Libya in recent years (to liberate it of its oil), assasinated its leader etc (all done using the "Royal Prerogative" BTW- there was no parliamentary or democratic mandate), leaving in its wake absolute chaos and destruction (to this day), you think this is all a coincidence ???

Corbyn should be applauded for his stance - cos what I want in a leader is someone brave enough to stand up and address the real root causes - not someone who is trying to make us believe that we are all in it together (we aren't), who wants us to believe they are doing us a favour (they aren't), and who bangs on in an absolutely monotonous repetitive patronising mantra everytime any atrocity like this occurs how strong the people of the UK are and how we are great for pulling together.

Patronising rhetoric isn't going to make one iota of a difference - reassessing UK foreign policy is. What the people of the UK want and need is events like Manchester not to happen again, simple as that. No amount of Cobra meetings and raising the security threat level is going to bring about change - nor intelligence for that matter. The problem has to be addressed at source - otherwise you are just papering over the cracks.

yeah its a stance that terrorism works, a great message to give out. Im sure Mondays suicide bomber would be delighted that theres now talk of changes in policy (albeit from an imbecile leader of one of the major parties) job done. And dont think that other potential terrorists arent watching and seeing that its now really starting to work, thats why it was such a stupid statement by Corbyn. If you want to address this stuff and change policy you dont do it the way he did.
The Manchester bomber's sister has claimed he was driven to murder because he wanted revenge for 'the explosives America drops on children in Syria'. - AMERICA so i guess it was a coincidence about Libya afterall

[fishtank]

The whole "war on terror" is clearly wrong headed because we're not really dealing with a terrorist group at all and that's where the Western governments have screwed up. After 9/11 there was a desperation to find a clear enemy to serve up to Joe Public, the truth is there wasn't one other than various disjointed groups so they dragged Bin Laden and his rag tag band of Taliban "freedom fighters" onto the world stage and created a monster.

It's understandable after an atrocity like Manchester that people want to see some kind of action but the kind of intervention based action that the UK has been involved in acts like a giant recruitment drive for Isis. A change in direction is required but I don't pretend to know what that is, neither does Corbyn but I suppose at least he's prepared to accept that what we've been doing so far has obviously not worked and has helped to excuse the radicalisation of terrorists.

If I would be brave enough to put forward a solution all I would say is it probably lies within the Muslim faith, not through the imposition of will by a third party.

[jetblack]

Postie45 - you've got no answers - give it up mate.

How many suicide bombers have the Republic of Ireland seen ? Or Norway ?

This is exactly the time to be asking these questions - its not a case of making political capital - its a case of giving people the real hope that those in charge of this show have a desire to stop the slaughter instead of feeding us hogwash and hoping we'll swallow it - and everything remains the same. The political leaders (our "leaders") are the reason this is happening.

Here's a bit of food for thought. We did this.

Lets make it right. We now have the chance.

[Postie45]

Postie45 - you've got no answers - give it up mate.

How many suicide bombers have the Republic of Ireland seen ? Or Norway ?

This is exactly the time to be asking these questions - its not a case of making political capital - its a case of giving people the real hope that those in charge of this show have a desire to stop the slaughter instead of feeding us hogwash and hoping we'll swallow it - and everything remains the same. The political leaders (our "leaders") are the reason this is happening.

Here's a bit of food for thought. We did this.

Lets make it right. We now have the chance.

so ISIS dont have a caliphate ? you need to wake up to whats actually going on, you are so blind to it, You actually think its brought on by UK intervention and the halting of that would stop it is actually so wrong it would be amusing if the consequences werent so dire. The fact some countries havent been hit yet - its just a matter of time.

Belgium http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35869985" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sweden http://www.reuters.com/article/us-swede ... SKBN17B089" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
France http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/693 ... e-Normandy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Germany http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/652 ... State-ISIS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Denmark http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09 ... g-denmark/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corybn also stated today "That will almost always mean talking to people you profoundly disagree with. That’s what conflict resolution is all about." he suggesting negotiating with ISIS ? its just beyond belief to me. Again, showing his complete ignorance of that groups desires and intentions, and they dont make a secret of it. Im sure he has good intentions at heart, but hes beyond clueless on this matter and very public about it.

[jetblack]

No answers because you have only a faint awareness of the question.

The question is - can the death of up to 1 million Iraqi's in any way be justified by Exxon Mobil pulling out $0.5 billion a year profit from its oil interests in the country ?

Thats 1 million men women and children. 1 million. 1,000,000. 27 people a day for the next 100 years.

In 2016 there was roughly 1500 civilian deaths in Baghdad every f***ing month Postie45.

A question for you - what was the monthly death toll in Baghdad when Sadam was in charge, before we went in to "rid the world of terrorism" ? As an aside, what was the death toll from suicide bombers in the UK prior to Tony Blair's support of the US invasion/weapons of mass destruction debacle ?
I can give you the answer to the second question - it was zero.

And you think UK foreign policy has no part to play here ?

[Postie45]

do i really need to explain my "non" answer, i was pointing out that many NON uk countries are also being terrorised, And that was far from an exhaustive list as im sure youre well aware.

Youre talking like the cat isnt already out of the bag, guess what ISIS is here, they have a goal, its much bigger than fighting the "invaders". Sure lets ignore them now, lets just let them get on with it over there, let them get bigger through fear,rape and killing (and of course they wont be terror attacking Europe / US in the meantime right ?) lets negotiate with the people who devoutly want to bring on the end times and / or global implementation of their version of Islam.. because that make sense. Unchecked and unstopped how long until they become nuclear armed ? 5,10, 20, 30 years ? If it ever gets to that stage .. well it doesnt bear thinking about

Its the same deal with Saddam, altho by comparison he was semi sane. Unchecked and unstopped there was going to be huge issues in that region, he got taken out and its caused other problems sure. But that doesnt mean the original threat wasnt worth eliminating.
1970s - 2003: 270 mass graves are found, leading to charges of the killing of tens of thousands of people.
1988: The Anfal ('Spoils') campaign is designed to depopulate the Kurdish regions in northern Iraq. Up to 182,000 people are killed or die from cold and hunger and entire villages are razed.
1988: A chemical attack against the Kurdish village of Halabja kills 5,000 people in one day during the Anfal campaign.
2006 + im sure he would have turned into a lovely bloke who concentrated on stamp collecting and flower arranging

Basically one problem solved, another is started, so lets not solve any problems then we cant take blame for the problems which arise from the solutions to the original problem right ? Should the US have joined the fight against the Nazis ? it was a Europe problem let them get on with it, dont want to risk causing some other problems right ?

"A question for you - what was the monthly death toll in Baghdad when Sadam was in charge, before we went in to "rid the world of terrorism" "
how accurate do you think these figures are ? nevermind, lets say theyre accurate, its a case of selective data. Going again to the Nazi example - What was the monthly death toll in Berlin when Hiter was in charge ? probably not too bad im assuming, doesnt mean he wasnt causing devastation elsewhere.

"As an aside, what was the death toll from suicide bombers in the UK prior to Tony Blair's support of the US invasion/weapons of mass destruction debacle ?"
none thats im aware of - and as ive pointed out, ISIS has other goals clearly stated, and have attacked many other nations. Makes this question a fallacy imo.


You want to bring up oil, its so tired, yes some companies took advantage of that, but was that the goal of the war on terror ? if you honestly think that then we have no more to discuss as $0.5 billion per year isnt worth going to war over - that war is costing the US alone $1,725 BILLION. If you ever think that the US led alliance went in to make some kind of profit on a war then youre mistaken.

[jetblack]

You are making it very complicated Postie45, because you are trying to square the circle.

It isn't that complicated.

I could spend an hour giving you a very detailed response about the seven sisters oil cartel, about Israel and Saudi Arabia's national interests and metropolis+satellite theory, about Iran, about the western media's hegomony, about US funding of ISIS in Syria - but quite frankly I think it would be a waste of time.

All wars are economic. If they try to tell you otherwise its because they have an interest in you believing otherwise.


Jeremy Corbyn was right today - the Labour Party of 2017 are right.

Vote otherwise and you are condemning us to repeat the mistakes of the past for the benefit of the few (that are unaffected).

[Postie45]

ah a conspiracy ? ok then - not what the actual group themselves are saying.

"A global caliphate
ISIS frequently uses its online magazine Dabiq to set out its vision. The title of the magazine is no accident.......

The revival of the caliphate is the launching pad for a global battlefield. No caliph can govern without pursuing offensive jihad, and that jihad will continue, as Dabiq put it, until "the shade of the blessed flag will expand until it covers all eastern and western extents of the Earth."

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/11/middl ... caliphate/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isis wants all Muslims to declare allegiance to its caliphate and the caliphate to rule all the world. Its more practical objectives are to survive and expand which it has so far succeeded in doing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 52950.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Practically, Isil wants what its name suggests: statehood. Its ambition is for the borders of that state to be ever expanding, first taking in the Middle East and then spreading across the world.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... hieve.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jetblack]

Mike Tyson said the white man arrived in Africa with a Bible in one hand and a gun in the other.

What of it ?

Your links are neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things - and don't explain anything.

[Postie45]

not if your minds made up already i spose, ill leave it there, thanks anyway

[jetblack]

Yeah - thanks. Have a look at the links I posted.

[NWpostie]

I don't think it really matters whether we invaded any where or not. It has been going since year dot. It really started kicking off, with the attack on World Trade Centre, they've already got fifth columnist operating in this country under cover waiting to strike, as we have seen with 7/7 and Manchester, thanks to uncontrolled immigration encouraged by left wing activists in the name of multiculturalism, it wasn't challenged as debates were closed down by charges of racism.

Wd don't need to invade for them to bomb here, it's just a matter of time when they start to undermine western Europe, recent events have brought their plans forward.

So IRA sympathiser Corbyn is not in the real world with regards to realpolitik and strategic planning, Burying your head to the threat will not make it go away.

So it's May for me all the way for Brexit and National Security.

I can't see Corbyn as Prime Minster.

[aiden01]

Postie45 - you've got no answers - give it up mate.

How many suicide bombers have the Republic of Ireland seen ? Or Norway ?

This is exactly the time to be asking these questions - its not a case of making political capital - its a case of giving people the real hope that those in charge of this show have a desire to stop the slaughter instead of feeding us hogwash and hoping we'll swallow it - and everything remains the same. The political leaders (our "leaders") are the reason this is happening.

Here's a bit of food for thought. We did this.

Lets make it right. We now have the chance.

so ISIS dont have a caliphate ? you need to wake up to whats actually going on, you are so blind to it, You actually think its brought on by UK intervention and the halting of that would stop it is actually so wrong it would be amusing if the consequences werent so dire. The fact some countries havent been hit yet - its just a matter of time.

Belgium http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35869985" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sweden http://www.reuters.com/article/us-swede ... SKBN17B089" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
France http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/693 ... e-Normandy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Germany http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/652 ... State-ISIS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Denmark http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09 ... g-denmark/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corybn also stated today "That will almost always mean talking to people you profoundly disagree with. That’s what conflict resolution is all about." he suggesting negotiating with ISIS ? its just beyond belief to me. Again, showing his complete ignorance of that groups desires and intentions, and they dont make a secret of it. Im sure he has good intentions at heart, but hes beyond clueless on this matter and very public about it.

so postie 45 how do you think we have a realtively peaceful future in n.Ireland it all begins by talking to people you don't like or despise whether you like it or not.

[Tman]

Jet'll say the sun rises in the west if Jezza tells him to.
To state "we" brought it on ourselves with the ridiculously-named "war on terror" is the lazy cause-and-effect logic of the Corbynites.
The US was hit in it's embassy in Beirut, the USS Cole and the WTC attack long before 9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Iraq.
Prior to the "war on terror" campaign the blame was laid at Israel's door, but with anti-Semitism apparently rife in Corbyn's Labour that's not a good excuse to use just now while the media are watching intently.

[Postie45]

so postie 45 how do you think we have a realtively peaceful future in n.Ireland it all begins by talking to people you don't like or despise whether you like it or not.

ISIS have no interest in talking, they have a one result outcome, its not going to change through talks. Please read their own rhetoric, its not open for debate, theres no chance of agreement (unless we decide to accept and live under their religious beliefs) They have a god who tells them what to do through passage and verse, an apostate talking to them isnt going to change their minds. Its 100% clear in their minds and they can point to passages in the Koran which is telling them to do this. The thing that gets me is no matter how many times ISIS say this, I dont think people take it seriously or its just a side problem and what they really want is the West out of "their" land. NO, please read their very own literature, they make no secret of their goals its very clear.

The IRA were different, not only did they live in the real world, but when US backing dried up after 9/11 and also weariness that their acts werent getting the results they desired, they came to an agreement. Some in the IRA were angered by it, others celebrated it as a "win". Notice they didnt come to an agreement before their position was weakened. ISIS is far from being a weakened force.
I agree it would be great to talk to ISIS and show them the error of their ways, but its wishful thinking on our part to think this would be successful.