Parliament votes to launch Airstrikes

BBC

Parliament has just voted to approve the use of British jets in airstrikes in Iraq, not in Syria (yet)

Ive been watching the debate thisafternoon and some interesting points have been raised, both for and against, Whilst I agree that ISIS/ISIL, whatever they call themselves, need to be stopped, im not sure that airstrikes only will get the job done, sure they'll have a big impact, but to flush out every last remnant of ISIS, I cant see any other way than boots on the ground, which I don't support.

You beat me to it by seconds.

The moton limits strikes to Iraq only and any actions in Syria would need a seperate resolution.

The Tornado's we have in region could be used as early as the weekend - I also wonder if they'll use the Typhoons in a swing role as well.

Time will tell on how this pans out, but I have no problem with British armed forces going after cold blooded murderers at all.

Isn't it strange that a county that still has a monarchy had an open debate on this issue, while a country that is a "democracy" decided to pass on the debate and give all power to the Dear Leader until January?

Step it up, America. Demand a full hearing and debate from our representatives, recall them from the campaign trail. Let's at least do the bare minimum here and give this some thought.

David Cameron stated that IS is a threat that will almost border with a NATO ally...

So maybe they'll let IS take ground so troops can be sent in on foot...
They should do so anyways whether IS gain more ground or not...


I'd have voted Yes...
I'm glad they did, & I'm glad it's limited to Iraq who asked for assistance...
If Syria ask, then vote Yes again, but I feel boots are needed, it's what Army's are for surely!

a reply to: neformore

I think its inevitable that we will end up carrying out strikes in Syria though, and I think we should, as you say, I have no problem with British forces going after cold blooded murderers, I agree!

I just cant see airstrikes alone completely wiping out ISIS, lets see how it pans out

This is just some crazy stuff.

I wish I knew what was REALLY going on. Maybe I am just being paranoid but my gut feeling remains the same.

Resources are the top priority, not saving lives.

a reply to: neformore

Interesting point on the use of Typhoons, according to the news we have only 6 Tornados on standby in Cyprus already, im sure some aircraft experts will be along soon to explain why the Tornado would be preferred over the Typhoon, range? missile/bomb capacity? some other reason?

So it looks like the US/France/Iraq will be joined by the UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Canada and Australia in airsrikes in Iraq. While in Syria it looks to be the US/Saudi Arabia/Bahrain/UAE/Jordan/Qatar most likely to be joined by France. Before all is said and done I would not be suprised to see Egypt and a couple of other NATO members join in as well in one place or the other.

I wish I knew what was REALLY going on too

Well,
now IS has a target to shoot down from inside the Syrian border...

"Someone in Syria shot down our plane! Thanks for leaving hardware behind; cough cough."

Without the hardware left behind this scenario can not play out, but,
we will see it come to fruition due to all sides cooperating with each other.

It's like a song that writes itself.

I remember the WMD threat and the 'intelligence' that we had last time, this feels very much like that.
The US is already dropping bombs over Baghdad, now you guys are about to join in.
I'm getting a serious sense of Deja Vu.

Its all about the Qatar pipeline that the emir wants to build the answers are clear.

There's a debate right now on Radio 3's Question time.

Like one of the panelist remarked, this will only make matters worse and cause IS to gather more support.
How exactly does IS pose a direct threat to the UK?

And does IS have clear HQ, training camps etc or are we just going to bomb any old building and risk the murder of
innocent civilians like the 1000s killed in Afghanistan?

When innocent civilians are killed by the West, we call it collateral, and when it's done by the 'terrorists' it's a despicable act of evil.

There is no plan to this airstrike. It makes little to no sense. A war on terrorism has no end and no achievable objective.

Good job MPs - Well fu@#king done.

originally posted by: ukmicky1980
BBC

Parliament has just voted to approve the use of British jets in airstrikes in Iraq, not in Syria (yet)

...and as soon as the bad guys set up in civilian neighbourhoods..."Oh No...we didn't see that coming! Now we'll have to use ground troops to ferret them out."
Surprise, surprise!

A war on terrorism has no end and no achievable objective.

Similar and unfortunate, qualities are shared by CIA and CSIS but nobody cares about that. Only they care and that's ok. Losers are people too.