The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[nirvana]

Cameron could be many things but I don't think he's stupid. It's not a popular or populist position and has loads of potential downsides for his personal standing. Virtually no upsides

[AlunB]

The UK and Saudi Arabia use Brimstone missiles. They cost a 100k each and seem like a really serious bit of kit. I do wonder if they are quite as good as we seem to think, otherwise surely all our allies would be buying them.

It's quite possible our allies don't see this as a particularly valuable or important feature

[titaniumbean]

Thousands of civilians will die in this, for little strategic benefit. This is tragic. But also, we are playing exactly into Daesh's 'Western aggressor' narrative. We will turn civilians in Syria into members of the Islamic state, further perpetuating the cycle stated above.
Finally, even forgetting the human cost, the financial cost to us is astronomical. That money could not only be spent on a better NHS/Schools etc, but could also provide better ways to protect this country and the world from terror attacks.

This quote is used a lot in comments about this and it is unclear as to what is being said, i think it means thousands of civilians will be killed accidentally by RAF bombers in Syria only. This won't happen.  

Assad has killed tens of thousands of his civilians, daesh thousands as well, this is tragic. Any loss of life is bad.

daesh do not need bombing as an excuse to kill, Tunisian beach killings were because bikinis were being worn not burkas,

They are also against Shia Muslims as well, not just the CofE, although I doubt they can explain the difference between CofE and Catholicism.(mind I can't and neither could most people in the uk)

The financial marginal cost to the UK for adding bombing to Syria is relatively tiny. uK annual govt spending is about £600bn, the marginal cost of flying 12 jets (already paid for and salaries paid for) will be in the tens of millions. This is less than govt spends on the NHS between breakfast and lunchtime today.

Am I in favour of adding Syria to the counties where we can bomb daesh, meh - it's irrelevant, they hate us either way, and the UK bombing will make no strategic difference. The issue is important but not significant in the greater scheme of things.

Some of this post is spot on, some seems not so.


The highlighted bits I just cant agree with.

The first bit seems like 'no you' playground response. Suggesting we definitely wont cause collateral damage when nations are suddenly 'finding new targets' when weeks and thousands of bombs have already been dropped seems really hopeful. We seem to have no concern for any negative consequences whilst merely politically posturing to make ourselves feel like we're one of the big boys.


You realise once we drop bombs, we then have to replenish the stockpile? Therefore we have to outlay shit tonnes of money, our super special doesn't hurt civilians bomb when it explodes having been dropped from a very big height cost alot of money. We then enjoy dropping them and cropping clips of them exploding for war porn and we get excited, and we can feel less worry about collateral damage so we find more targets drop more bombs, need more bombs, outlay more money and the cycle repeats.


I still dont get why anyone thinks WE can suddenly do more with our bombs than the guys who have more practice than us? are our bombs more polite and going to win the hearts and minds with berets?

The UK and Saudi Arabia use Brimstone missiles. They cost a 100k each and seem like a really serious bit of kit. I do wonder if they are quite as good as we seem to think, otherwise surely all our allies would be buying them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11134475/Why-the-British-Brimstone-missile-being-used-in-Iraq-is-so-sought-after-in-60-seconds.html

However, precise a weapon is, it needs to be hitting an actual ISIS target, as alluded to in the guardian article AlunB posted.

I think its possible we are bombing Syria because Mr. Cameron thinks it will be a popular decision, rather than the best decision for the country.

And even if the financial cost is marginal, that doesn't mean the money couldn't be better spent elsewhere.  

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34211979   This article is a bit scary. It definitely makes me uncomfortable.

Million the US care about collateral or will have their little brother having better kit than them with the budgets they outlay on weapons every year.

Love the 'it landed here and didnt hurt the guy there 1 time' attitude as if yeh def. it's some super smart 'bomb' that lands, questions everyones political opinions then politely declines to hurt those it agrees with....


Million, France then UK suddenly knew of new targets that had been missed in past few thousand bombs.

Tis all just politics as you say, he thinks he'll look good for making this decision, and party politics is what matters right?  Who cares about the human cost or the utility of the money being spent, all whilst he writes his local MP berating him for cutting front line services.

Politics for the media is such a disgusting joke.

[MintTrav]

So, what of these 70,000 fighters who we are told are key to defeating Daesh and taking Raqqa once Daesh's capabilities have been degraded? It seems that only the moderate groups are likely to co-operate with the Western alliance. During the debate, Yasmin Qureshi of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, just back from the region, claimed that everyone they had spoken to had indicated that the numbers were actually 10-15,000. She appeared to mean that these were the moderates, as some of the groups are definitely larger than that. However, they are not a unified force. The Free Syrian Army and the Sunni Militias may be sufficient to tackle ISIL, but there are up to 1,000 different rebel groups. In any case, they are currently tied up fighting Syrian government forces (when they are not fighting each other) and we are told that they are annoyed at the expectation that they will divert from that to take on ISIL. Even if they do, they are not positioned close to Raqqa and they are still being bombed by Russia, which is targeting all anti-Assad groups, but mainly the rebel forces rather than ISIL. It would seem unlikely that they would be able to confront ISIL if Russia continues to bomb them, even if they wish to.

Click to see full-size image.

(The white areas are largely desert or mountain, but are more or less under ISIL control.)

[TightEnd]

"Cam could be forced ‘out’

THERE is mounting alarm inside Number 10 about how close the EU referendum will be.

“There’ll be at least one poll that puts No ahead just days before the referendum,” one senior source frets.

This concern has led to David Cameron doubling down on his demand that EU migrants shouldn’t be allowed to claim either in or out of work benefits until they have lived in the UK for four years.

This is Cameron’s only major ask on immigration and with public concern growing, he must get it.

But holding out for this will delay the referendum."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/suncolumnists/6785192/James-Forsyth-Prime-Minister-is-eager-to-delay-decisions-on-Heathrow.html

[TightEnd]

President Tusk writes to EU leaders on "difficult" issues raised by UK

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/12/07-tusk-letter-to-28ms-on-uk/

[Longines]

Is this a circle?

Click to see full-size image.

http://tinyurl.com/jo8xnyq

[rfgqqabc]

Click to see full-size image.

[TightEnd]

Why did the polls get it wrong?

Too many politically interested young people, not enough over 70s (to simplify)

 http://bit.ly/1QrJVOe

[The Camel]

Meanwhile I just looked at the betting for next Tory Leader for the first time since the summer.

6/4 Osborne
4/1 Boris

WTF is all that about?

Isn't Gideon the most unpopular man in the country?

[Doobs]

Meanwhile I just looked at the betting for next Tory Leader for the first time since the summer.

6/4 Osborne
4/1 Boris

WTF is all that about?

Isn't Gideon the most unpopular man in the country?

Answering the second question first, he is only 2nd to Jeremy Corbyn in the unpopularity stakes.

The answer to the first question is are you confusing the voters in the Conservative leadership election with the whole UK electorate? 

Boris would be a far more popular leader, but that doesn't mean he'll be the chosen one.  A bit like the big disparity in the opinion of Corbyn between Labour supporters and those that had a vote in their leadership election.

[The Camel]

Meanwhile I just looked at the betting for next Tory Leader for the first time since the summer.

6/4 Osborne
4/1 Boris

WTF is all that about?

Isn't Gideon the most unpopular man in the country?

Answering the second question first, he is only 2nd to Jeremy Corbyn in the unpopularity stakes.

The answer to the first question is are you confusing the voters in the Conservative leadership election with the whole UK electorate? 

Boris would be a far more popular leader, but that doesn't mean he'll be the chosen one.  A bit like the big disparity in the opinion of Corbyn between Labour supporters and those that had a vote in their leadership election.

Fair enough on all that, but what has happened since the summer that has turned Boris from roughly Evs to 4/1?

[Doobs]

Meanwhile I just looked at the betting for next Tory Leader for the first time since the summer.

6/4 Osborne
4/1 Boris

WTF is all that about?

Isn't Gideon the most unpopular man in the country?

Answering the second question first, he is only 2nd to Jeremy Corbyn in the unpopularity stakes.

The answer to the first question is are you confusing the voters in the Conservative leadership election with the whole UK electorate? 

Boris would be a far more popular leader, but that doesn't mean he'll be the chosen one.  A bit like the big disparity in the opinion of Corbyn between Labour supporters and those that had a vote in their leadership election.

Fair enough on all that, but what has happened since the summer that has turned Boris from roughly Evs to 4/1?

Dunno really.  The red book thing certainly went down well, and whatever you think, he is more trusted on the economy.  But having said that, Boris must be a bet at 4/1?  Things change.  The economy stumbles and the prices reverse?

[TightEnd]

Tony Blair rues ‘tragedy’ of Labour under Jeremy Corbyn: http://bit.ly/1R9u0FJ 

sure to go down well...

[RickBFA]

Tony Blair rues ‘tragedy’ of Labour under Jeremy Corbyn: http://bit.ly/1R9u0FJ 

sure to go down well...

Blair has an almost evangelical Christian like view of his time in power - he is blinkered by self belief. Totally delusional for me.

His leadership was a disaster for our country, certainly when it comes to foreign policy.