Blah Blah Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Today I read Stop the War Coalition's response to Cameron's speech on Syria this week. I think it makes some very valid points worthy of discussion. *Stop the War Coalition's response to David Cameron's case for bombing: *Stop the War believes that David Cameron's incoherent proposals for action in Syria will do nothing to weaken Isis but will instead inflame the civil war, deepen the misery of the Syrian people and increase the terrorist risk. We are urging MP's to consider carefully before voting to take Britain into our fourth war in fourteen years. *1) Strategy.* David Cameron failed completely to outline a coherent strategy to defeat Isis. He was unable to explain why British bombing will be any more effective than that which has been conducted by the much larger US forces with their allies over the last 13 months. The US admit that in that period Isis has been recruiting steadily and that it has gained territory in Syria. Cameron also failed to explain where ground forces might come from. Kurds will not fight outside their own territories. As Julian Lewis MP suggested, the estimate of 70,000 'moderate' Free Syrian Army troops appears to have been snatched out of the air. Al Jazeera estimates a figure of half that and reports that FSA forces are fragmented and demoralised. In their view the FSA 'has seen its power wane dramatically this year amid widespread desertions.' *2) Legality. *Cameron appears to accept that the fact that last week's UN resolution didn't have Chapter 7 status means it cannot be used to legitimise foreign attacks on Syria. He falls back on the self-defence argument. This is inapplicable. The right of self-defence applies to a foreign state invasion, not reported attempts at attacks by handfuls of terrorists. *3) Civilian casualties. *As before every new war David Cameron tells us that modern weapons have 'extraordinary precision' and will cause 'minimum collateral damage'. As ever these claims are belied by facts. The available research confirms hundreds of civilians have already been killed by coalition bombs. There are numerous individual reports of deaths caused by bombing, including one recent estimate of twenty killed by coalition raids on a Raqqa suburb. Despite the propaganda, drone attacks lead to high levels of civilian deaths. Recently a leading US general, Mike Flynn, pointed out that 'drone strikes have created more terrorists than they have killed.' Raqqa , which Cameron wants to be at the centre of British attacks, is a city already half devastated, with a population of 200,000 people. *4) Transition and negotiations. * There is a glaring contradiction between Cameron's claim to be prioritising a 'ceasefire' on the one hand and advocating military intervention on the other. Military action will complicate and hinder not hasten existing negotiations. The chaos of civil war is creating the conditions in which Isis can thrive. A political solution is necessary for people of the region to be able to tackle Isis. Adding fuel to the flames of that war makes such a solution more distant. *5) Dealing with terrorism.* David Cameron failed to answer questions about whether bombing Syria will make terrorist attacks in Britain more likely. The record of our interventions so far has not been good. The fourteen years that encompassed the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq and the bombing of Libya have seen the spread of jihadi terrorism from small pockets of Central Asia through a massive arc stretching from Lahore to Lagos. Now attacks are spreading to Europe. In the opinion of Eliza Mannigham-Buller, Director General of MI5 during the period of the invasion, Britain's involvement in Iraq, 'increased the terrorist threat by convincing more people ... that Islam was under attack'. If Britain embarks on a war against a fourth Muslim country, threat levels will rise. * **6) A safer world.* The Prime Minister claims that differences between the various forces intervening in Syria are closing, making co-operation easier. This is a fantastic claim impossible to reconcile with the recent shooting down by Turkey of a Russian plane and the subsequent attack on a Russian helicopter by Syrian rebels. David Cameron is asking MP's to vote to plunge Britain into a maelstrom of competing powers centred on Syria without any apparent co-ordination or plan. Russia, in particular, is apparently attacking the very forces with which Cameron wants us to co-operate. *7) The alternatives.* Bombing is not the only available foreign policy. Among the many positive measures that could be taken are isolating Isis and other jihadi groups by ending arms sales to the most reactionary and authoritarian regimes in the region, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar. These are countries that sponsor terrorist networks in Syria. We should also pressure Turkey to stop allowing its borders to be used for the supply of arms and fighters into Syria. Crucially Britain and the US should pursue rather than impede peace negotiations. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Aelfheah Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 All good points. even if we could defeat IS by bombing the civilian areas in which they are highly dispersed, where's Cameron's plan for what happens next? I cannot see it making us safer frankly, it'll just create more resentment, uncertainty and chaos. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-932383 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Aelfheah Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Good article by David Davis on this: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/29/should-parliament-endorse-uk-air-strikes-in-syria Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-932394 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blah Blah Posted December 1, 2015 Author Share Posted December 1, 2015 I think he's spot on rahrah. Is Corbyn right to not use the whip? Cameron has no such qualms. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-932891 Share on other sites More sharing options...
???? Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Corybn can't afford to completely lose the PLP....yet, don't worry John's putting their names in his little red book though :) Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-932903 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Aelfheah Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Agree with quids that Corbyn has little choice, that said, I also think it's right that it should be a free vote. If ever there was an issue of conscience, sending bombs to kill people is surely it. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-932912 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blah Blah Posted December 1, 2015 Author Share Posted December 1, 2015 :D ????. I think you may be right. I'm inclined to agree rahrah. Have never liked the whip thing. Cameron is whipping his party although I think there will be rebels for him too. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-932970 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 I think a free vote was the right choice. But I also think it's good that Corbyn has asked for a full 2 day debate on the matter, and I will be interested to see how he performs. Could be a key moment. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933005 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otta Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Ah, but Cameron has refused and it will be a one day debate. Result almost feels inevitable now the free vote has been given.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34973637 Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933027 Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncleglen Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Does not look like bombs will be very effective since the terrorists, like the Palestinian terrorists, have built networks of tunnels under the ground. The pictures on the BBC make you think that they have been a long time in the making. Germany has said it will commit 1200 troops..... Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933085 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratty Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 I don't understand the blood lust. I like what Corbyn said today. There will be no hiding place for those voting for it when the inevitable massacre of civilians happens. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933243 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blah Blah Posted December 1, 2015 Author Share Posted December 1, 2015 And therein I think is the real thinking behind Corbyn's decision to give a free vote. He has a strong conviction of where it's going to lead and is pretty much saying 'be it on your own head' if you vote for it. The other thing as well is the short memories of the Blairites, because it was the failed outcomes of the Iraq invasion that did for Tony Blair. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933259 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Aelfheah Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 I read this morning that Cameron has resorted to calling Corbyn a 'terrorist sympathiser'. I don't think it's going too far to suggest that this demeans the office of prime minister. It's a serious issue and regardless of ones views on Syria, or political allegiance, I can't believe anyone can genuinely defend this kind of flippant, bullying rhetoric. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933384 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingMummy Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 I agree rahrahrah. Opposing the air strikes, on the ground that it will only make a very bad situation worse, and be as ineffective an answer to terrorism as say, hmm the war in Afghanastan... Or to say that air strikes as a response to the Paris attacks would be disproportionate (as well as useless), and to query why European lives should be valued so highly above Syrian lives... These are not arguments that express sympathy with terrorists. They do the opposite.Cameron says this kind of stuff, and it's like a prep school debate team is playing with the ISIL question. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933387 Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhistory Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Does anyone know what Helen Hayes MP has to say? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933390 Share on other sites More sharing options...
nashoi Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 http://www.helenhayes.org.uk/my_views_on_syria Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933397 Share on other sites More sharing options...
miga Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 That's an interesting take on things from Helen Hayes: "get the Russians to stop supporting Assad". There was an article a couple of months back from Marti Ahtisaari (AFAIK, a respected diplomat and not known for being full of it or indeed for being a Russian stooge, Nobel laureate etc.), who said that Putin had through negotiators offered the removal of Assad "in an elegant way" as a bargaining chip three years ago, if the other side would stop backing the opposition. I guess IS was an unintended consequence and "we" thought Assad would have been defeated by now.Classic Cold War BS, with a huge humanitarian cost. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933426 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveR Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 "I read this morning that Cameron has resorted to calling Corbyn a 'terrorist sympathiser'"Corbyn has a long history of being a terrorist sympathiser - Irish Republicans, Palestinians etc. He calls them 'freedom fighters' though. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933462 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DulwichFox Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Comments like 'We are all in this together' and ' You are either with us or against us' would seem to imply that anyone against bombing Syria is themselves a 'terrorist sympathiser' This is simply not the case.. DulwichFox Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933475 Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidKruger Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Yeah when people fight back after their territory is occupied and their people abused they are called terrorists - usually by the countries / leaders responsible. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933480 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Aelfheah Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 DaveR Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------> Corbyn has a long history of being a terrorist> sympathiser - Irish Republicans, Palestinians etc.> He calls them 'freedom fighters' though.He actually went further than this, if reports are true. He said "You should not be walking through the lobbies with Jeremy Corbyn and a bunch of terrorist sympathisers." Implying that anyone voting against the airstrikes is somehow sympathetic to IS and their insane death cult.I don't think for one second that Jeremy Corbyn, or any other member of parliament who are voting against bombing in Syria are sympathetic to IS. To say such a silly thing in relation to such a grave matter, on the eve of a serious parliamentary debate, is frankly pathetic. Cameron should be thoroughly ashamed. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933516 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blah Blah Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 Yes that's how I took Cameron's comment too, that anyone against bombing Syria is a terrorist sympathiser. I think it's a completely unacceptable statement from a Prime Minister. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933549 Share on other sites More sharing options...
???? Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 I think it was an incredibly stupid and partisan thing to say by Cameron. He's meant to be PM for F Sake Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933550 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loz Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 Yep - I cringed when I read Cameron's comments. I suspect he just lost a few Labour MPs sitting on the fence on the subject. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933560 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blah Blah Posted December 2, 2015 Author Share Posted December 2, 2015 Agreed, and he seems unwilling to apologise. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/85088-stop-the-war/#findComment-933585 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now