British jihadists killed in RAF drone strike

[hilts]

they may not look alike but they may just have the same Morals after all and the same thirst for power
I bet Corbyn speaks once the voting is done though

I am pretty confident that Corbyn is nothing like tony Blair

 

[hilts]

Murdering somebody is as bad as murdering somebody, no matter the cause or reason yes.



I disagree that it's impossible for a modern intelligence agency but can save that argument for another day. The larger point is that you're separating the same offence committed against different people.

Essentially I'm suggesting that murder by the Government is ALWAYS wrong and you seem to be suggesting that that is a negotiable position based on what they'd tell us. A question I have is that if they had got this wrong and he was just a lad wrapped up in some shit he didn't understand rather than a terrorist mastermind, how do you think they'd represent that to the press? Do you think they'd tell the press core that or paint him as a target that is absolutely necessary to eliminate no matter the reality?

If like I do, you think the Government understands the power of the media and PR, it would say this no matter what. Therefore we can't ascertain any real information from what we're told and instead need public disclosure.

So murder is murder no matter what, Damocles being overly simplistic, whatever next

 

[sir baconface]

To clarify the quote, for the benefit of the cerebrally challenged on here...

Since when did a GCSE in Liberal Studies qualify some random bellend to claim intellectual superiority?

 

[Damocles]

Many suicide bombers are poor lads wrapped up in something they don't understand.

That doesn't lower the threat they pose.

He's British. He's in Syria. He's released videos encouraging attacks. He's dead.

It's about time the gloves came off.

And how exactly will this solve problems?

To give you an analogy, I was today listening to an interview with a former Director of a wrestling company. The wrestling business in the 90s was predicated on TV exposing the product and then they made their money from doing non-televised live "house shows" events, running at around 18% EBITDA yearly. In the late 90s there was a major company that was doing TV and running these live events but they were losing money every time they went out of the door on those events. His rationale was "why would we want to go out and lose money?" but the appeal to tradition was strong and there was a large management/political fight on his hands to get it to achieve that.

My question is somewhat similar. We've been controlling the Middle East and bombing the shit out of them for the best part of 5 decades and look where we are. How do you feel that more of the same will garner a change in circumstances rather than a different approach?

 

[The perfect fumble]

they may not look alike but they may just have the same Morals after all and the same thirst for power
I bet Corbyn speaks once the voting is done though

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...s-members-jihadists-syria-kill-list-ministers

Jeremy Corbyn leads cross-party group of MPs warning government has no legal basis for move as Lib Dem sources say they would have vetoed move in coalition

As the defence secretary Michael Fallon said ministers would not hesitate to approve further strikes against jihadis who have their own kill list, Jeremy Corbyn led a cross-party group of MPs who raised doubts about the change in strategy.

Corbyn said: “There has to be a legal basis for what’s going on. This is war without parliamentary approval. And in fact parliament specifically said no to this war in September 2013.”

 

[whp.blue]

I am pretty confident that Corbyn is nothing like tony Blair

His morals seem to be repressed to ensure he is Elected seems very much like Blair to me

 

[Damocles]

So murder is murder no matter what, Damocles being overly simplistic, whatever next

Yes, murder is murder no matter what. This isn't overly simplistic any more than saying red is red, City are City or hilts is hilts. It's just literally saying that thing is the thing that it is named after.

I could give more examples of things that are things but fear that it might take me a little while to cover them all.

Also, either make a point to argue or fuck off.

 

[hilts]

His morals seem to be repressed to ensure he is Elected seems very much like Blair to me

If he was a power mad career politician he would have made a move long ago, he may be delusion. But I believe he is 100% genuine in those beliefs, I actually have a lot of respect for the guy, we need more like him

 

[whp.blue]

If he was a power mad career politician he would have made a move long ago, he may be delusion. But I believe he is 100% genuine in those beliefs, I actually have a lot of respect for the guy, we need more like him

are you trying to claim he is not a career MP how many years has he been in Westminster? he has lacked ambition until now that point I will concede.

 

[Le Havre Oswald]

nobody in Syria can possibly be an imminent threat to the UK

if somebody in Syria is directing attacks on the UK then they must be communicating with the UK so why didn't we just intercept these communications and use the info to stop our homegrown terrorists?

haven't we royally fucked up here?
If you get toe cancer from a tumour in the leg you don't just chop the toe off. You try and stop the main cause of it. It's all good stoping the ones trying to do the actual dirty work but if they fail someone else will do it instead. It's better stoping them at the source isn't it not? Be it a drone or whatever.

Edit. I'm a shit quoter.