Blah Blah

I think it would be good if the developers met with the Bussey people and perhaps the council too. Maybe there's a solution in there somewhere for all concerned.

There's no doubting he's too much for some Labour supporters, but others have gone back to supporting Labour because of him. So I think it evens out in that case. But I think he is a long way from winning a General Election at present. What is made of Corbyns stance on bombing Syria depends on what you think will sort the situation out. There are many MPs and experts on all sides echoing Crobyns stance - that Syria is a four way war, that bombing without an effective ground operation makes things worse, and that a ground operation without a workable system in place beyond it is also folly. Experts keep pointing out that IS is run by ex ba'ath coomanders, and is essentially a Sunni fascist movement. These are the people that used to run Iraq - Saddam's henchmen. They know how to smuggle arms etc. They are the result of the disastrous exercise of invading Iraq. I think instead of leaping to bash Corbyn, it might be better to acknowledge that western military intervention in the middle east has largely been a failure, understand why and then suggest something that might work instead of more of the same. THAT is why Cameron will not win a vote on bombing in the Commons. Very little to do with Corbyn at all. I think Dave those are just the beginning of the problems with Seamus Milne. He's the son of a millionaire and sends his kids to grammar Schools (and not just any grammar schools) and was himself privately educated at the best schools etc etc. Seems a really odd appointment to me all round.

Geography lessons? Most countries have no nuclear weapons so I don't think that ownership of them is necessary for National security. We are not going to leave NATO either. We do not live in a dictatorship. Corbyn is not going to force his view of nuclear arms on his MPs. He has argued though that money spent on trident would be better spent on our armed forces, which doesn't sound like someone opposed to national defence to me. I am ambivalent on the issue of nuclear arms. I can see the merits in both sides of the argument. But it's getting tiresome, this continuous onslaught against Corbyn. All it is doing is making peole like me, who weren't even in his camp before, more determined to defend him from the ridiculous hysteria of the right.

No-one in their right mind thinks Corbyn is a threat to national security, for goodness sake. There is no army coming from the Middle East to invade us. And many of those committing terrorist attacks are born in, and of the nation they attack. Thoughtful article on this here. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/15/multiculturalism-assimilation-britain-france?CMP=share_btn_tw

Foxy gets a lot of unfair backlash from what I've seen, on many occasions. I'm too am sure he didn't mean to offend anyone.

Lol Miga, put those skewers away. Yes I acknowledge I confused Bosnia with Kosovo. My hands are held up. It doesn't though change the point that bombing in the middle east has achieved nothing. Look at Libya and Iraq now! At the time of 9/11 the only adversary was Osama Bin Laden and his base of Afghanistan. Now the whole region is in disarray and America's ignorant invasion of Iraq is a major reason why. I say ignorant because that is a clear example of why using bombs and troops witout ANY respect for or understanding of local politics, history and culture is disastrous. They learned nothing from Vietnam. Stability has to come from the ground, through the people and their leaders themselves. All that we have done is opened a pandoras box with no end of people now who are willing to kill themselves to do us harm. In fact they will kill anyone who stands in their way, hence the carnage in the middle east that millions of refugees are fleeing from. The situation is not helped by most of the region being ruled by religious dictatorships. And if we didn't need the oil, we'd leave them to it quite frankly. Our whole history of involvement in the region has been one of propping up dictatorship after dictatorship as long as they sell us oil and work for us. The plight of ordinary people and their human rights has never been a priority. You only have to look at the recent visits by the prime ministers of China and India for proof of that. A more interesting discussion to have would be one of how we change our relationship with the middle east in a way that is positive for the region.

You are not comaparing like for like though Fox. We are not facing an army like that of Germany in WW2. No-one is trying to invade us after invading half of Europe.

I agree with Loz. Terrorists want us to be afraid and affected. In reality they are small in number and can never really threaten our way of life. They don't have an army big enough. That doesn't help those who are murdered of course, but containment is the only defence we have at home. Sadly some plots are always going to get through, but in reality more people die in car accidents every year than do from attrocious attacks like those in Paris. We need to keep a sense of perspective and make sure the security services have everything they need to keep us as safe as possible.

I know the difference ????. Bombing from Nato achieved nothing. It took negotiators on the ground and a dramatic gain by Croat fighters to force a final negotiated solution, negotiations that had gone on for a long time with Milosevic's lack of co-operation. When the Croat push came, those well developed negotiations gave a way out. Had they not been in place, the Croat offensive would have continued. The UN peacekeeping force were in, as you rightly point out, the ridiculous situation of having no mandate but to stand by and watch massacre. But the point remains the same. Bombing does nothing but destroy infrastructure. The people who suffer most are innocent civilians. It's almost as though we've learned nothing from Stalingrad as a tactic of war. The ONLY way any of these conflicts will stop is when those on all sides get together and agree to stop. And Syria has highlighted perfectly the problem for the West when neither side is a democracy. There needs to be a change in direction in how we tackle these things, because bombing just polarises the extremists hatred for the West. Totally agree Otta. We need to find ways to stop people being brainwashed by these terrorists in the first place.

You are a character ????. I enjoy sparring with you :D

Here you go..... http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kosovo/etc/cron.html Tell me what part of that shows that bombing stopped the war in Kosovo. The truth is that there is NO solution to what is going on in the middle east unless the warring factions decide to stop warring. It doesn't matter who is in government. No one has a solution to any of it. Edited to add, that now the US have announced (with Russian help) moves to achieve a ceasefire in Syria and get talks going between the two sides. There is no other way.

Tut tut ????. You really don't know much about Kosovo do you? It wasn't military intervention that stopped the massacres, the UN troops there were a peacekeeping force and not allowed to intervene in conflict. Bombing did nothing. That is well documented. It was actually diplomacy through the Dayton Accord that ended that conflict.

I accept your points Red Devil, but nothing we are doing or have done for the last 100+ years has brought stability or democracy (whatever our version of demacracy is) to that region, nothing. It's no good jumping up and down and claiming someone has no quality to be a prime minister just because they don't say that more of the same is the solution. Emotions are running high today and for understandable reasons (as Otta says). But yesterday I saw a photo of about 15 dead Syrian children. No-one knows if they were killed by ISIL crossfire, or American or Russian actions. Just on Jihadi John, I was simply making the case that to some, his pain free and instant death would not have been any kind of retribution at all (and that's what I beieve Corbyn was saying too). And in the culture he was operating within, he would be seen as a martyr anyway. These people are brainwashed into seeing death as a reward. That's what makes them so dangerous. France does have a complicated history with Algeria, Morocco and terrorism. It has also bred resentment from migrants for generations (anyone of colour is regularly stoppped in Paris to have papers checked) and there is a migrant underclass pushed out to the suburbs. That's before we even get into their laws on the wearing of a hijab. All of those things conspire to create the prefect recruiting gound for the kind of cells that want to inflict the kind of harm they did yesterday.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Talk me through resolution of the conflict and > defeating ISIS via the UN Blah rather than the > touchy freely peace loving concept? Meanwhile > yesterday military action by the Kurds supported > by air strikes from the US liberated 1000s from > the tyranny of ISIS Only if you talk me through how bobming and invasion has brought about any stability in the Middle East.

Interesting ed_pete. I wonder how people manage the noise in those flats? I take your point about the ventilation Londonmix. I still think people like fresh air though. Maybe they will appeal to young people who won't mind the noise.

Just to give you a different perspective ????, what Corbyn actually said was this..... ?It appears Mohammed Emwazi has been held to account for his callous and brutal crimes. "However, it would have been far better for us all if he had been held to account in a court of law. ?These events only underline the necessity of accelerating international efforts, under the auspices of the UN, to bring an end to the Syrian conflict as part of a comprehensive regional settlement.? I don't think many people could disagree with any of that. He knows as well as we do that it is logistically impossible to extract people like Jihadi John from the ground. What he was expressing, was a view on what is achieved by this kind of assassination. The truth is that Jihadi John has already been replaced. The murder of Westerners does not stop. And as for Jihadi John himself - he had a quick death that he probably didn't know much about. So what has been achieved? Absolutely nothing, bar one pain free death of an easily replaced ISIS executioner. The current government, just like Blair, have no answer to terrorism, or the refugee flight, or the conflicts in the Middle East. Cameron wants to bomb Syria. That is exactly why last nights terrorists attacked Paris apparently - because the French are bombing Syria. Now ask yourself, who is more likely to keep us free from attack? The man who wants to bomb Syria? Or the man that wants to try and find an international resolution via the UN.

Good point Dave. I just think, given that Rye Lane is a retail business area, that buisness space throughout the building would be more appropriate. Instead of flats there could be affordable office rental space. I'll admit that I don't know anything about rents and space availability in Rye Lane from a business perspective, so don't know if it's a daft idea or not.

Thanks for pointing that out LondonMix. Mechanical ventilation is what exactly? It's just a fan isn't it? And what that seems to say is that the noise of a fan will mask external sound? In the heat of summer, that won't be enough to ventilate I think.

That was what I meant when I said it's not the right location for flats - being right on the doorstep of the Bussey. I take the point about flats being elsewhere around the venue, but most of those are not right on the doorstep. Maybe soundproofing the flats will work, but what happens in summer when people want to have their windows open?

There's a lot of sense in his comments and a reality check too. If the public want decent public services taxes will have to go up. But what party making that case will be electable? I think this is a hole that both the Conservatives and New Labour have dug for themselves. It's all very well moving to an individualistic competitive public consciousness, but there are consequences. Demographically we are changing and there will have to be a collective shift to recognise the reality of that. It's going to mean more tax, or a higher workforce (which means imigration and developing an economy to support that). Many people will just not be physically able to work to 75. Political parties need to be more forward thinking instead of clawing to keep things working as they are. Or as Ken warns, the backlash will come.

El Presidente Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The thing with housing is that people always > support it being built in principle, but when in > practice a proposal is put forward they these > principles are easily abandoned. This is not true. What is to be found though are plenty of objections of the type of housing being built. London needs a mix of tenure, from social to luxury and it needs strong communities too. These are being destroyed by the rush to profit from the boom, the result being a social cleansing of whole areas of the capital.

Because unlike other residential units LondonM these are right on the doorstep of the Bussey and Railway.

Peckham isn't a dump, and even if it were, the answer is not to drive out the small businesses that give it so much character and replace them with more of the same you find everywhere else. Khan's is my favourite store because there's nowhere else like it. There are restaurants on every corner! I'm suporting the petition because as much as we need housing I don't believe that is the right location for it.

But what is the measure of underperformance? Exam passes? We have this idea that educational achievement is the measure of success. But it's not. It's just a measure of who goes to University. Environment and nurture is a better measure.

Yes I agree Rodney. I think you are falling into the trap of media steroetypes KidK. There's not doubt that people like that do exist, but it's not any bigger a problem than it ever was. In the past, those families were the canon fodder, filled the factories and mines - jobs that were boring, repetitive and meeded more stamina than skill or thinking. 50% of young people go on to do degrees. Some of the rest follow other formal education or training routes. I don't think any of those young people lack work ethic. They do whatever they can to improve their chances of getting a job. The generational welfare dependence is out there, but a lot of it is in areas blighted by unemployment and decline. It's not a black and white issue. And successive governments have failed to find any answer to it. Even in London, advertised unskilled jobs recieve hundreds of applications for just one job. There are people who are just left behind by it all.