The Politics Thread

[Dr The Singh]

Do people still think we haven't done everything we can to get the help of the Arab League?

We've been trying for 18 months, they aren't interested.

Can't wait until the Justice League is formed, Batman and Superman will kock n there ass, no need for the Arab League

[Sharpe's Fox]

Regarding moaning Blairites, it seems a bit precious that you're getting upset you're getting bombarded with trolling on Twitter when you've just voted to bombard Syrians with a bit more than a hashtag.

[Guest MattP]

Politics is going bonkers, Stan Collymore resigned his Labour membership and has joined the SNP (appearing to be completely unaware of the Iraq situation) Little Mix are now claiming to be experts in Islamic theology and Ken Livingstone is on the television denying he's been sodomised by six men in succession.

2015 will never be surpassed as the most barmy political year in history.

[Stadt]

The thing with airstrikes is that I think eventually we're going to realise they've helped,marginally, but it's not going to win this war and committing western ground forces are the only way to completely destroy the immediate danger of ISIS, I think we have to go the whole hog now to take them out. The current coalition if all of the countries involved each put forward some more ground forces, airstrikes, special forces etc ISIS are completely ****ed and we're hopefully in and out. Pissing around with airstrikes hoping 'moderate' rebels, the Kurds and whoever else are going to defeat the lunatics is naive and wishful. Ultimately we;re going to have to commit ground forces so let's do it sooner rather than later to save a few months/years of airstrikes preventing ISIS gaining ground and actually destroy them in lieu of destroying their progress.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and the oh won't somebody think of the civilian casualties brigade don't seem to be realising that ISIS will be killing more civilians than any airstrikes will.

[MooseBreath]

Solar, Wind , tide exist they need money and drive to become more efficient. Just like computer chips and batteries!

None of them are replacements for oil though. You can't run a petrol car on solar power

[Merging Cultures]

None of them are replacements for oil though. You can't run a petrol car on solar power

I don't know about that.

What if instead of filling up with petrol you could simply switch out batteries which have been charged by solar. I'm having a PV invertor system installed which chargers deep cycle batteries by solar for when the power goes out.

I believe there are some attempts at doing the battery swap thing.

[MooseBreath]

I don't know about that.

What if instead of filling up with petrol you could simply switch out batteries which have been charged by solar. I'm having a PV invertor system installed which chargers deep cycle batteries by solar for when the power goes out.

I believe there are some attempts at doing the battery swap thing.

Yes you can reduce demand for oil by converting cars and vehicles to electric but you can't reduce demand for oil just by researching and installing renewables like solar panels, which is what FIF was saying

[Guest MattP]

Labour wins Oldham, better result than expected as well.

Candidate is a Blairite who voted for Liz Kendall though, so he might be deselected soon.

[Guest MattP]

Won by 10,000, that's a shocking result for UKIP. Diane James trying to make out it is is pathetic.

Farage now claiming on Twitter he's got evidence of fraud, he better be able to back that up.

[Merging Cultures]

Yes you can reduce demand for oil by converting cars and vehicles to electric but you can't reduce demand for oil just by researching and installing renewables like solar panels, which is what FIF was saying

But not what you said

It's OK Moose.

[Alf Bentley]

Labour wins Oldham, better result than expected as well.

 

 

 

I predicted just a 2000 majority, you predicted 8000, as I recall....turns out to be 10,000

 

I should clearly listen to the professionals.

 

A strong, well-liked local candidate will be part of the story, but interesting to know if the Syria situation influenced the result. A surprisingly poor result for UKIP, given the social make-up of the seat and the chaos in the Labour Party.

The EU referendum campaign will be along soon to boost their media profile again, though.

 

Wouldn't be confident of Labour performing so well in a southern marginal seat, though politics is in absolute flux just now.

[Rincewind]

I hadn't seen that actually. So a third of the Labour party voted for the further action. The SNP stuck to their word too, that not a single one of them would vote for it.

I wonder how many of those that voted yes are anti-Corbyn?

[Bettsj2]

Won by 10,000, that's a shocking result for UKIP. Diane James trying to make out it is is pathetic.

Farage now claiming on Twitter he's got evidence of fraud, he better be able to back that up.

He also said its probably because most of Oldham don't speak very good English!!

For once certain sections of the press have absolutely nothing to bash Corbyn over. So many had already written their pieces about a disastrous defeat or narrow victory.

Not a Corbyn fan by any stretch of the imagination but its great to see so many smug journalists being retweeted this morning.

[Alf Bentley]

I wonder how many of those that voted yes are anti-Corbyn?

 

 

Nearly all the "yes"-voting Labour MPs are anti-Corbyn, plus a large proportion of the "no"-voting Labour MPs! The natural support for his political views among the parliamentary party amounts to only about 20-30 MPs.

 

That's the essence of the problem for Labour: a large proportion of the grassroots membership supports him, but the majority of the parliamentary party has a different political perspective. That includes many who oppose the bombings or voted against them out of loyalty. I don't know, but I'd also guess that a high proportion of Labour councillors are not Corbynistas.

 

There is going to have to be either a compromise between some people with very different views or a leadership challenge will become inevitable at some point.

 

Jon Ashworth was on Newsnight yesterday, adopting an interesting line: stressing the degree of common ground on domestic/economic policy between "moderates" and "Corbynistas", and just accepting there's a big split over foreign policy.

 

Another guest pointed out, though, that while this is tenable as an opposition 4-5 years out from the next election, it would be completely unacceptable to the electorate in the run-up to an election. Having a few backbench rebels at that point would be acceptable, but not a leadership split down the middle on an issue as important as military action - and that's the case with the shadow cabinet at the moment.

[Bettsj2]

The question for those of you who would not add a few British bombs to the Syrian effort, is what would you do beyond what is already happening? I don't think doing no more is an option at this stage.

Hear that quite a bit from politicians for the bombing and the pro bombing audience members on QT last night. 'So we just do nothing?' I dont think anybody that opposed the bombing wanted to do nothing. In fact, all that i've heard were quite a few suggestions on what else we could do the best of which I heard was to force our 'allies' into providing support on the ground. A ground force of 500,000 troops from America, UK, France, Belgium, Turkey, Kurds, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia to tackle on the ground, and the politicians do more to tackle the ideology.

We never tackle the ideology. All we ever do is say that communities (especially the Muslim community) should be more vigilant. That means nothing.

[ramboacdc]

germany votes to attack syria. 

[Jon the Hat]

I don't really think anything strategic is going to kill off Daesh. They're a movement, an idea, you can't wipe that out with bombs and guns either way. Bombs and guns give them ammunition to recruit and hit back.

 

I'm absolutely not saying don't do anything, I'm not even saying DON'T attack them physically, we clearly can't roll over and do nothing. I just think committing to airstrikes is half-arsed and will ultimately be counter-productive. They're "our" (NATO's) responsibility, at the end of the day, they're a bacteria that's grown out of our Petri dish.

 

Lets go in, flatten the arseholes ruining it for everyone but this time actually spend a bit afterwards. Have a whip round and build them some schools, mosques, universities, hospitals, halal McDonalds, give them wide screen TVs and good healthcare and a good education system (yknow, like Saddam had in Iraq.) Give them a few less reasons to be ****ed off with the West.

 

That's what we do best, isn't it? Throw money at areas, do 'em up. I mean, it worked on Hackney and Shoreditch.

 

They already have hipster beards!  This is a master plan - Middle East gentrification!

[Jon the Hat]

More seriously ,l think we are already doing everything that has been suggested, although we could put more pressure on Saudi, it is not likely to involve them invading.  Ultimately they are Sunni, and they are not going to attack Sunni's and help Shias. 

[davieG]

Who, What, Why: What is the Brimstone missile?

• 9 hours ago
•  
• From the sectionMagazine

Image copyrightMBDA Missile Systems

In today's Magazine

 

The UK has launched air strikes on Syria, amid much talk about the accuracy and precision of the Royal Air Force's Brimstone missile. What exactly is this weapon and why is it considered so important by many, asks Justin Parkinson.

 

It's sold as the "most accurate precision strike product on the market" and has seen service with the RAF in Libya and Afghanistan. After MPs backed strikes against IS - also known as Daesh - in Syria, it's likely to be used there, as it already is against the jihadist organisation's members and facilities in Iraq.

The answer

• A missile seen as more precise than its rivals, with an explosion that takes place over a limited space
• Fired from Tornado jets, it can target individuals or hit vehicles travelling at up to 70mph
• But critics of air strikes question how decisive it will really prove in Syria

Weighing 49kg, 1.8m long and thought to cost more than £100,000 apiece, each Brimstone is fired from Tornado GR4 jets up to seven miles from the target, at altitudes of up to 20,000ft. Currently, the countries carrying out strikes on Syria don't have the capability of launching missiles from fast jets, but have to do so from the ground or helicopters, says Nick de Larrinaga, Europe editor of IHS Jane's Defence Weekly. "Using jets allows more missiles to be used on a single mission," he adds. The Tornado is capable of carrying up to 12 Brimstones.

The UK and Saudi Arabia are the only countries to have purchased Brimstone. What sets it apart from other missiles is its guidance system, allowing a greater degree of accuracy, especially when aimed at moving targets such as tanks. The most up-to-date "dual-mode" version can direct itself using radar or be guided by a weapons operator in the air or on the ground, using lasers. The RAF is planning to convert Typhoon F2 jets to be able to carry Brimstones, with the Tornado fleet due to be retired in 2019.

Jump media player

Media player help

 

Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue.

Media captionWhat hardware has the RAF deployed from the UK?

Manufacturer MBDA promises a "low risk of collateral damage", important when attacking individual IS leaders, who may be living among civilians used as human shields. This is because explosions can be limited to smaller areas than with other missiles and bombs, and with less debris. It's been reported that, in Afghanistan, people standing in doorways have been hit, while others a few feet away were left unharmed.

Image copyrightMoD/Corporal Mike Jones

"It could kill someone sitting in a car outside a house with the only damage to the house being perhaps a couple of broken windows," says independent defence analyst Paul Beaver. This, allied to the long operational service of the RAF crews involved in firing Brimstone, makes the UK's involvement in air strikes on Syria "incredibly useful" to its allies, he adds.

Image copyrightMoDImage copyrightMoDImage captionMinistry of Defence footage shows a Brimstone missile destroying a tank in Libya in 2011

The missile is able to attack vehicles moving at up to 70mph. If infrastructure is targeted, there will be less widespread damage, meaning that facilities like oil fields can be repaired more easily when they are recaptured from IS, says Beaver.

The weapon's capabilities were used by supporters of British intervention to make their case. Brimstone helped Prime Minister David Cameron in his air strikes, Beaver argues, as it means the mission in Syria is likely to involve fewer civilian deaths.

Supporters and opponents of British intervention in Syria disagreed about the significance of Brimstone. Its accuracy made the government's case for RAF involvement in air strikes easier to argue, says Beaver. Prime Minister David Cameron said it allowed opponents of IS to "strike accurately with minimal collateral damage".

But Paul Rogers, professor of peace studies at Bradford University, says that however precise the weapon, ruling out civilian deaths in air strikes can never be a "certainty".

Rogers acknowledges the technical virtuosity of Brimstone but argues its role is "far more important symbolically" than in the overall military campaign against IS, as it will account for a "tiny proportion" of the total air strikes carried out by all countries.

Similarly, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn told the House of Commons that claims about British missiles were "hard to credit" because the US and its allies were already "struggling to find suitable targets". He added: "In other words, extending British bombing is unlikely to make a huge difference."

[davieG]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34973901/eight-things-people-get-wrong-about-syria-and-air-strikes

 

Eight things people get wrong about Syria and air strikes

[The Horse's Mouth]

Farage is such a bitter loser

[Guest MattP]

I predicted just a 2000 majority, you predicted 8000, as I recall....turns out to be 10,000

 

I should clearly listen to the professionals.

 

A strong, well-liked local candidate will be part of the story, but interesting to know if the Syria situation influenced the result. A surprisingly poor result for UKIP, given the social make-up of the seat and the chaos in the Labour Party.

The EU referendum campaign will be along soon to boost their media profile again, though.

 

Wouldn't be confident of Labour performing so well in a southern marginal seat, though politics is in absolute flux just now.

 

Thank you

 

I agree, but it was still a result I thought would be far closer, no one even in the Labour party expected to win by a such a margin. The candidate does look a very good one mind, heard him speak a few times today and he comes across as a really nice bloke, the sort you'd love to spend a Sunday afternoon having a pint with.

 

On the subject of "bentgate" Farage never helps himself with his comments but he certainly has a point again about postal voting, why in areas with a high ethnic population does postal voting explode to 20,30 or even 40% in by-elections? Postal voting should be available to those who can't make it to a polling booth, it shouldn't be a choice, the idea of going to a polling station and into a booth is so no one else knows who you vote for.

[Buce]

Thank you

I agree, but it was still a result I thought would be far

closer, no one even in the Labour party expected to win by a such a margin. The candidate does look a very good one mind, heard him speak a few times today and he comes across as a really nice bloke, the sort you'd love to spend a Sunday afternoon having a pint with.

On the subject of "bentgate" Farage never helps himself with his comments but he certainly has a point again about postal voting, why in areas with a high ethnic population does postal voting explode to 20,30 or even 40% in by-elections? Postal voting should be available to those who can't make it to a polling booth, it shouldn't be a choice, the idea of going to a polling station and into a booth is so no one else knows who you vote for.

Maybe these hard-working ethnic minority families are too busy working to take time off to vote - hence the postal vote.

Or has anyone looked at the age demographic? Maybe there are a lot of housebound elderly people in the constituency.

[Alf Bentley]

Thank you

 

I agree, but it was still a result I thought would be far closer, no one even in the Labour party expected to win by a such a margin. The candidate does look a very good one mind, heard him speak a few times today and he comes across as a really nice bloke, the sort you'd love to spend a Sunday afternoon having a pint with.

 

On the subject of "bentgate" Farage never helps himself with his comments but he certainly has a point again about postal voting, why in areas with a high ethnic population does postal voting explode to 20,30 or even 40% in by-elections? Postal voting should be available to those who can't make it to a polling booth, it shouldn't be a choice, the idea of going to a polling station and into a booth is so no one else knows who you vote for.

 

 

I agree with you about postal voting. Democracy is important and should be treated as such. Maybe I'm old-fashioned or an idealist, but I think that going to the polling station should be valued and appreciated as a civic duty. It shouldn't be a triviality done by letting someone else fill in a postal ballot paper on your behalf or by clicking a box on the Internet between looking at FoxesTalk and YouTube. Postal or computer voting has to be an option for people who are too old or ill to go to the polling station or who are away on election day, have unavoidable care duties or whatever, but that should be the exception. My Dad is 90 and has Parkinson's but shuffled 150m to the polling station in May, quite literally the longest distance he has walked all year. More people should have his attitude. Sorry, I'm turning into Alf Garnett here! 

 

Postal voting probably boosted the majority, but the UKIP candidate still only got just over half as many votes as he did in Heywood & Middleton at a time when Labour is in a mess, suggesting that UKIP has gone backwards big time since the general election - in that area, at least. No cause for any Labour crowing, though. Will be interesting - and possibly sobering for a few Corbynistas - when a byelection occurs in a marginal seat in middle England. 

[Bettsj2]

why in areas with a high ethnic population does postal voting explode to 20,30 or even 40% in by-elections?

I think its because they are all working 24/7 in the NHS and cant make it to a polling station.