[Closed] Forum House of Commons vote on air strikes in Syria - which way will you vote?

Refreshing to see Saudi Arabia being associated with ISIS multiple times on ch4 news tonight.

Really? That is good news, I despair for humanity a little less.

Thank [s]dog[/s] god

after different voters

For example; say I'm a 'centrist', who believed the bollocks spouted by the tabloids, and has been horrified by the prospect of [i]having[/i] to vote Tory or 'waste' a vote on the lib dems because my party has gone all Trotsky. Is it not conceivable that I could start to feel that actually now I've heard Corbyn on the old Jeremy Vime show and he sounded like he made a lot of sense, AND THEN that old Etonian pillock whom I'd never trusted anyway basically tells me that I love ISIS because I have doubts about this crap kneejerk response to Paris, means that I'm going to look into what this Corbyn chap ACTUALLY has to say rather than the misquoted sound bites atributed to him by the establishment press. Shock horror, I'm a Corbyn fan now.

x several thousand. Maybe.

It's possible.

they're each after completely different voters

I call bullshit.

About the only thing that is clear in the world of Labour is which voters they are after. It aint Tories. Equally, I can't see hard core Corbynites voting Tory.

But we'll see.

Verdict is in on 1st round of voting

[url= http://www.itv.com/news/story/2015-12-02/syria-airstrikes-vote-mps-poised-to-decide-after-heated-debates/ ]
MPs reject amendment blocking airstrikes against IS in Syria by 390 votes to 211~ 179 majority in favour of airstrikes[/url]

MPs will now vote on the motion backing airstrikes targeting the terror group in Syria.

The UK government wins the vote backing airstrikes in Syria by 397 votes to 223 - a majority of 174.

We'll have to gauge public reaction over the coming days and weeks

.

what was the STW verdict - i dont have time to skim the last 10 pages

and apart from just quoting pointless guff, did anyone else even read the select committee paper, nevermind any other evidence, not sure some of todays speakers had.

So there you have it, the government is going to bomb Syria 🙁

Toyota shares will be on the rise, along with Hilux production.

Oh,I feel so much safer now.

Well we can all rest easy knowing that Renton is on his way to sort shit out!

As long as he doesn't ask every bloody day how he should do it.

Wait, did Renton plan the Paris attacks to ensure he'd get a new job?

Jambabolix strikes again as I predicted a 75 majority just a 1 out, 175. I doubt the government will have a clearer majority throughout the life of the Parliament

Seems roughly 1/3rd of Laboir MPs voted in favour. Hilary Benns speech widely praised, interesting he compared them to fascists, I imagine Daesh would see themselves as very egalitarian - provided you are a member of the club. The "educational" classes in Luton which Vicenews filmed showed young women being told housing is allocated purely based on need, size of family etc

The Labour Party are in such a shambles they are unable to be anything but the center of the story. That plus the fact that very many people understand Corbyn and McDonald to be terrorist sympathisers, IRA, Hezbolah, Hamas. MacDonald might have tried to apologise on Question Time but only the die hard leftists will have been impressed with that.

Labour have landed no blows on Cameron. Post the debate I saw more Sky airtime from the SNP than Labour "No" supporters

AIUI SNP whipped against.

Ed Milliband voted against.

Jambabolix strikes again as I predicted a 75 majority just a 1 out, 175

Well done 100 out and predicting the thing that was only going to take place if he could win was a win.

Any chance of the lottery numbers this week 😉

only the die hard leftists will have been impressed with that.

Seems roughly 1/3rd of Laboir MPs voted in favour.

I see, it's not just Labour Party members who were opposed to bombing Syria, even two thirds of the Parliamentary Labour Party were also opposed.

So it turns out that one of Corbyn's principle opinions which he is renowned for, ie opposition to bombing, is shared not only by the majority of the Labour Party but also by the majority of Labour MPs.

Not quite what some people have been saying ever since he first announced his bid to become leader of the Labour Party.

And it also turns out that Cameron had to rely on the usual Blairite right-wing New Labour pointless MPs to save him from humiliation.

I think there's a lesson we can all learn there.

two thirds of the Parliamentary Labour Party were also opposed. ... I think there's a lesson we can all learn there.

Yes, the lesson is a capable Labour leader would have prevented UK jets bombing the other side of the line.

I can't find the whole speech but here's the final 1:24 of Benn. Corbyn looks distinctly grumpy by the end 8)

I can't find the whole speech but here's the final 1:24 of Benn. Corbyn looks distinctly grumpy by the end

As a supporter of an extremist group who believes in the killing of civilians to further their aims - I'm sure you're elated tonight.

And it also turns out that Cameron had to rely on the usual Blairite right-wing New Labour pointless MPs to save him from humiliation.

Actually the LibDems and the DUP got him there, needed no help from Labour to win but obviously he felt a large majority was important.

jambalaya - Member
I can't find the whole speech but here's the final 1:24 of Benn. Corbyn looks distinctly grumpy by the end

Opps ... think he might be the next "king" with that speech.

The stuart might have to relinquish his comfortable seat soon by the looks of things. 😀

obviously he felt a large majority was important.

Can you imagine the humiliation of winning the vote by just one or two, despite having a comfortable majority in the House of Commons?

Just as well for Cameron that the usual Blairite right-wing New Labour pointless MPs, along of course with the pointless LibDem MPs, where there to save him from humiliation.

That is a new definition of comfortable majority to me.

The government has a working majority of 17, that's a comfortable majority imo.

You are of course free to call it a wafer-thin majority if you prefer.

There is a small but definite possibility that Cameron does Corbyn's job for him eventually.

If this goes bad in Syria or is used as the "reason" a major terrorist attack takes place in the UK he is going to face some extremely inconvenient questions about his leadership.

Also why after its become pretty clear that the whole middle east is basically "toxic" as far as western intervention is concerned.... and the absolute mess Iraq and Afghanistan turned into... he fought SO HARD to drag us into another conflict.

Just one Tornado going down and 2 pilots being paraded online before being beheaded could easily bring him down.

God forbid that any UK citizens or Forces personnel lose their life just to humble that idiot though!

Corbyn and McDonald

Jamba - at some point are you going to learn the name of the Shadow Chancellor ?

Is this all true?

[img] ?oh=96859302d821527ee7665496959006a7&oe=56F54863[/img]

So the RAF has bombed some oilfields, in order to reduce Daeash's income, that they couldn't have bombed yesterday due to being the wrong side of an arbitrary line in the sand.

That's been a disaster then!

Everyones crowing on about Benn's speech and how pissed off Jezza was, but Dave'll be the one party leader the most pissed off. He was deprived of his 'We Will Fight Them on the Beaches....' moment by the son of a bloody commie!

So the RAF has bombed some oilfields, in order to reduce Daeash's income, that they couldn't have bombed yesterday due to being the wrong side of an arbitrary line in the sand.

Well without their revenue from oil I can't see how they can carry out a terrorist atrocity in a European city now. Unless they manage to get an overdraft or something. I feel safer already.

Btw the Russians were bombing ISIS oil assets when one of their planes was shot down by a NATO warplane. Obviously everyone knows exactly what they're doing and I can see it all being over by Christmas.

Well without their revenue from oil I can't see how they can carry out a terrorist atrocity in a European city now. Unless they manage to get an overdraft or something. I feel safer already.

They'll have to max out their credit cards for car rental. Then the banks will get angry and they'll REALLY be in trouble.

I'm loving all the in-depth descriptions of the Tornado's different awesomez weapons systems on the front pages of all the papers, and being talked through it on every news bulletin.

gets me rest moist, it does

So the RAF has bombed some oilfields, in order to reduce Daeash's income, that they couldn't have bombed yesterday due to being the wrong side of an arbitrary line in the sand.

Aye, and if a few civilian oil workers happen to get blown to chunks by our precision guided British values - that's just tough.

[s]If[/s] [b]when[/b] this goes bad in Syria [s]or[/s] [b]and[/b] is used as the "reason" a major terrorist attack takes place in the UK he is going to face some extremely inconvenient questions about his leadership

Which he will bluster through like the buffoon he is and order more bombs, when he should be accepting direct responsibility.

These Islamist terrorists have a long list of reasons from Western intervention in the a Middle East, repression of their right to practice their religion, the crusades or simply that the Koran gives them the right, indeed the obligation to wage Jihad against apostates.

I see once again we have posters pointing accusing fingers at the leader, the vote was nearly 2:1 in favour, an overwhelming collective decision of our Parliament

I see once again we have posters pointing accusing fingers at the leader, the vote was nearly 2:1 in favour, an overwhelming collective decision of our Parliament

Somewhat different from the proportion of the population in favour of bombing. The bloody terrorist sympathisers eh?

Hurray for representative democracy!

Heres what my MP wrote yesterday ...

[i]All the business has been cleared from today’s agenda in the House of Commons and the whole day which has been extended to 10pm will consist of a single debate on the motion set out in my last post. This will give 10 and a half hours of time for debate.

Not surprisingly I have received hundreds of emails urging me to vote against military action. It is clear from most of them that the senders appear not to have a full understanding of the situation in the middle east. the situation is extremely complex. I do not pretend that extending our military action across the border from Iraq to Syria will be a solution on its own to the threat from ISIL but it will, in my opinion, on balance, help defeat ISIL and I will vote for it. I should add that I have had some constituents urge me to vote for the motion[/i]

So thats me told. I don't have full understanding of the situation apparently. Thankfully my [s]patronising bell end of an[/s] MP does though. Phew!

binners - Member
Everyones crowing on about Benn's speech and how pissed off Jezza was, but Dave'll be the one party leader the most pissed off. He was deprived of his 'We Will Fight Them on the Beaches....' moment by the son of a bloody commie!

Nope, still don't have the PM look I am afraid ... might be good at arguing but most opposition politicians are so what's this emotional speech?

Ya, but we all know that Labour cannot be voted in for at least two generations whether the commies can make good speeches or want to fight on the beach or apply their guerrilla warfare.

Commies are commies and will always be commies trying to micro-manage the life of each individual coz that is who they are. 😆

Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention yesterday but I seem to remember a lot of those in favour siting the RAF's superior skill and weaponry as being neccessary to attack ISIS in their stronghold of Raqqah as a matter of urgency in order to releive human suffering. Buuuut they've gone and targeted oil fields, which I presume (possibly ignorantly) won't be as densely populated as a city of 900,000 people.

I can't help but wonder why the USAF lacked the capability to do this.

I see once again we have posters pointing accusing fingers at the leader, the vote was nearly 2:1 in favour, an overwhelming collective decision of our Parliament

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Much like you.

El-bent - Member

I see once again we have posters pointing accusing fingers at the leader, the vote was nearly 2:1 in favour, an overwhelming collective decision of our Parliament

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Much like you.

We don't learn from history, we read it as story . We like story don't we, so what's your point exactly?

If human can learned from history we would be at peace long time ago so what's with your new found "wisdom"?

I see once again we have posters pointing accusing fingers at the leader, the vote was nearly 2:1 in favour, an overwhelming collective decision of our Parliament

Which just shows how removed parliment is from the wishes of the general public (~55% against bombing in yougov poll IIRC). As for pointing fingers, as with anything the buck must stop with the person in charge.

Cameron's argument is we need to bomb to protect the UK, but at the end of the day, most terrorists are domestic, perhaps go to middle east training camp and then return to plot. If our domestic situation wasn't conducive to radicalisation it would happen far less. Better welfare and better integration of minorities would be better for UK security than bombing oilfields.

Our political situation and removal from public interest is currently so bad I'm beginning to wonder if we are going to see some non-religious radicalization as people become so disaffected protest marches turn to riots and worse.

To be honest, if I thought I'd be remembered as a pig-****ing PM, I'd probably get us involved in a war as well.

deadlydarcy - Member
To be honest, if I thought I'd be remembered as a pig-**** PM, I'd probably get us involved in a war as well.

That's why you are not a politician or can be one.