Coffee House

Support grows for British air strikes against Isis

4 September 2014

4 September 2014

If there is a strategy buried under the ‘no strategy’ response by the US and the UK to Isis, it seems to be that David Cameron and Barack Obama have preferred to make the case for greater military involvement by waiting for everyone else to get frustrated that nothing is happening.

Where a few weeks ago, there was plenty of muttering about the polls and the public being weary of intervention, we see today that voters are starting to push for greater UK involvement. They are not, of course, in favour of boots on the ground (one of those phrases that is as worn out now as a very old boot, along with ‘knee-jerk response’): the Sun’s poll finds 58 per cent of voters are against ground troops. But 39 per cent say we should arm the Kurds, and 47 per cent are in favour of air strikes (with 31 per cent opposed and 22 per cent saying they don’t know). Similarly, ConHome reports a shift in Tory membership towards military intervention, with more Conservatives (albeit still a small proportion) supporting ground troops (11 per cent, up from five per cent in July), and one in ten saying we shouldn’t get involved in Iraq, considerably down from one in three in the summer.

Subscribe from £1 per week


David Cameron was on Today earlier, and he continued to refuse to rule out joining the air strikes:

‘Well, these are all things that should be considered, and we’ve supported the American airstrikes up to now, which have been helping to make sure that the Kurds… As I say, we’re not ruling anything out, I think we shouldn’t underplay what Britain has done already.’


Given Labour and the Lib Dems have also made supportive noises about Britain’s further involvement, at least when the leaders do decide what their strategy is, they’ll have a little more backing.


More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us.

Show comments
  • thomasaikenhead

    What poses the greatest threat to British society, ISIS or the gangs of Muslim men of Pakistani origin who groom, rape, beat and prostitute white, English Christian schoolgirls?

    1,400 victims in Rotherham alone, how many more on Rochdale, Derby, Oxford, Leeds, Bradford and so many other towns?

    Time to stop worrying about imaginary threats to the UK from Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya and actually do something about the very real problems in the UK?

  • Iain Hill

    Is this support just as strong in Scotland?

  • chouenlai

    There are some serious debates on here today about the performance of the Tory element of this government, and the wondrous change that would doubtless come about with a UKIP administration. Vote UKIP get UKIP hooray! However, whilst I like a laugh as much as anybody, the idiot section are having a great time with a final solution for Pakistani’s and nuking Iraq. Frankly this kind of talk is not only disgusting, but really damages UKIP’s chances. Any sensible right winger, considering supporting the party, would take one look at that and say “racist nutcases”, further, they would be right.

    • the viceroy’s gin

      It’s good to have you around, lad. We’ve long had that other socialist Camerluvvie here, who’s been UKIP’s best recruiter, but he’s been getting stale. You seem to be fitting right into that slot, fresh.

  • Augustus

    “Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.”
    -President G.W. Bush, Washington D.C., September 20, 2001.

    “Al Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL or ISIS) have significantly stepped up their recruiting efforts in Pakistan and other South East Asian countries, highlighting the competition between the two terror groups to enlist radicalized fighters. The big question here is going to be, ‘Will there be competition between ISIS and other hardline Sunni jihadist groups already operating in Pakistan or will they in fact come together the same way an earlier generation of jihadists came together with Osama Bin Laden when al Qaeda was founded.”
    – The Washington Free Beacon, September 4, 2014

    All these terrorist groups (and there are scores of them out there) have one overriding goal which will no doubt unite them in the end, even if it takes decades of warring between them to come to pass: To establish a worldwide caliphate in which the still ‘moderate’ Muslims become slaves of Allah, and will have to follow a strict and heavily punishable version of Islam. Non-Islamic survivors (dhimmis included) will, of course, be the slave class below even them. The Islamic leadership will have all the wealth and status it wants.

  • Graeme S

    I TELL YOU WHAT THE GREAT BRITISH PUBLIC ARE CRYING OUT FOR…. IS WHOLESALE REMOVAL OF THE 3RD WORLD DEAD BEATS WE HAVE IMPORTED. I TELL WHAT THE BRITISH PUBLIC ARE CRYING OUT FOR IS A GOVERNMENT WITH SOME BACKBONE

  • chouenlai

    Todays You Gov poll in the currant bun. Lab 36 – Tory 33 – UKIP 14 – LD who gives a s…
    You are not going to get many MP’s with 14% guys. In fact, with my technical expertise, I can disclose you will get sweet FA MP’s. Good job Clacton man did come over.

    • Colonel Mustard

      Ask the question why Cameron divided the right. He knew this would happen. But he burned bridges with his stupid uber-pundit pronouncements about UKIP. He tried to please his chums in UAF but they hate him anyway.

      Way to go for a strategy to win the next election! And you reckon he’s not a fool!

      • chouenlai

        Oh come on Colonel, the Tory right was tearing the party in bits over Europe when Mrs Cameron snr was wiping little Davids bottom. It wrecked John Major’s chances and gave us the blessing of 3 dose’s of St Anthony.

        • ButcombeMan

          It is wrong to imply that Europe is a left/right issue. It shows a complete lack of understanding.

          • HookesLaw

            Half as many again Labour as Tory would vote to stay in the EU. Twice as many LD as Tory.
            Fewer Labour don’t knows and half as many LD don’t knows. So the left is much more in favour of the EU and its mind is more made up
            (YouGov June 13)
            The public are not as anti EU as you suggest and the YouGov poll shows a clear swing to stay in the EU if any renegotiation were carried through.

            UKIP are battering ethnic minorities to bum up support. This has nothing to do with the EU. And of course this is an anathema to Carswell if not Farage and his ‘ting tong’ cronies.

            • chouenlai

              Right on.

              • Colonel Mustard

                “Right on” being the operative term to describe what is happening in the Tory party!

              • Chris Morriss

                Oh dear, that phrase is sooo last century.

                • Damaris Tighe

                  Sooo 1970s: smelly afghan coats, enormous flares, joss sticks. Yeah, right on man (puffs on joint).

          • chouenlai

            Well my understanding Mr Pompous is in line with 99% of political commentators. To be an anti – Europe Tory, or U Kipper puts you on the right. How many anti – Europe LD’s or socialists do you know.

        • Colonel Mustard

          It wasn’t Europe that wrecked Major’s chances given that he presided over signing the Maastricht Treaty but sleaze, sleaze, sleaze and Blair’s bull, bull, bull. Tory sleaze always seems more outrageous in this country than comparable Labour sleaze (go figure) and Blair’s bull was incomparable to anything.

          • chouenlai

            Well I totally disagree, the mess as you put it, stems from Conservatives being at serious odds about Europe. The sleaze issue obviously did much damage, but a divided party is not going to win anything.

            • Colonel Mustard

              All the more reason for Cameron to unite it then. He is, after all, supposed to be its leader. Good leaders strengthen and motivate their teams not divide them and then stoke further division by insulting his own grass roots.

              So you think Cameron’s posturing over Junker was consistent?

        • Holly

          The Tories lost in ’97 because they were sleazy, and arrogant.
          They did not deserve to win.

    • the viceroy’s gin

      Goodness, sounds dire. You best make sure not to split the UKIP vote, lad .

  • swatnan

    Bombing is indiscriminate and civilian casualties will be the collateral damage.
    Fighting man to man isn’t, and its a more honourable way of fighting than by drones.

    • HookesLaw

      What a pathetic toe rag you are. So sneakily planting bombs to blow peoples legs off is honourable is it? Taking prisoners and massacring them is honourable is it?
      ISIS can take what we, NATO and or the USA dish out and lump it.

      • swatnan

        Suicide bombing, using civilians as shields and murdering hostages is a cowardly way to fight; and dishonourable too.
        These islamofacists need to be excommunicated, and a fatwah put on their heads, given a fair trial, and guillotined.

    • Augustus

      Reuters are reporting that an air strike has, according to the Iraqi Ministry of defence, killed Abu Hajar al-Souri , the number two to the IS-leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. The air raid took place at Mosul in Iraq. So not always so ‘indiscriminate’.

  • WatTylersGhost

    Cameron could send an aircraft carrier to the Med and………. wait a minute, but he sent them all to Turkish scrapyards instead. Moron.

    • chouenlai

      Why did he do that? What was the Labour defence budget inheritance? I don’t suppose a troll like you either knows or cares.

      • Colonel Mustard

        £24 billion on foreign aid and fake charities.

        Projected cost of the carrier programme £6.2 billion. RAF down to 8 squadrons.

        World a more dangerous place than when Cameron, Clegg and Co took office but 2020 still on track to reduce our armed forces to next to nothing, whatever the guff used to make it appear an improvement.

        • HookesLaw

          Of course armed forces are not being reduced to nothing. Including reserves total numbers will be more and they will be well equipped. Only the other day a programme to start building (in Wales) hundreds of the latest AFVs for our ‘cavalry’ regiments was announced. Something like 3.5 billion was the figure. This is the first of a number of orders for this class of vehicle for the rest of the army.
          There is a fully funded and achievable 160 billion re-equipment programme under way. Plus there are hundreds of vehicles available from the Afghanistan ‘Urgent Operational Requirement’ purchases which are being brought home and available for use.

          • Colonel Mustard

            Which part of ‘RAF’ and ‘next to nothing’ did you not understand?

            Good luck in getting the cavalry to bomb ISIS with AFVs.

          • MrLouKnee

            The British Army values the hard work of the TA. Whenever heavy kit needs to be carried, or you need to send someone into open ground to see if there is a sniper, the TA are invaluable. Apart from them 2 uses, they are a useless waste of space.

            Being a soldier is a profession, god help us if we have to rely on weekend warriors

    • HookesLaw

      The planes from such tiny ships would be no use. As it is we already have bases in the Med from which we are already have far more powerful Tornadoes flying reconnaissance missions, and could fly bombing missions if we want. All more efficiently than using small Harriers from small carriers.

      One day you might learn to know what you are talking about. Only one moron here and I’ve got news for you – its you.

      • MrLouKnee

        The only moron here who doesnt know what they are talking about is you. The only uniform youve ever worn is your school uniform

  • WatTylersGhost

    Among my friends there is not desire to involve Britain in any other calamitous ME disasters. However, the hunting and killing ISIS traitors on our own streets seems to be popular.

    • ManOfKent

      Sure find those who’ve already returned by I’d prefer those still out there or any more that travel were not allowed to return to his country.

  • ManOfKent

    If the government can efficiently dispatch ISIS and end the atrocities being committed then they will likely receive the support of voters. However another long drawn out messy involvement in the Middle East will only drain support away.

    My guess is if they are going to do anything it must be done and dusted by Xmas and certainly well and truly in the past by next year’s election..

    • Holly

      My guess is, bombing ISIS over there isn’t going to stop it’s supporters remaining over here, and attacking us from within.
      Labour’s Thornberry will do nothing to infringe their human rights, and Cameron and the government’s hands are tied to what Europe says we are allowed to do with them, which doesn’t seem to be going to change any time up to 2017.
      It’s not looking good.

      Surprisingly, I am more in favour of, and willing to accept/live through years of financial/business turmoil after leaving Europe, than I am for the status quo.

      • rodger the dodger

        How much would it cost to build walls around tower hamlets, Bradford, rotheram, the middle of birmingham etc. and just leave them to it?

        Just wonderin’…

        • Holly

          I have no idea, but ‘targeted’ b om ing once they are built would not upset me too much.

      • Mynydd

        The UK have signed international treaties which define human rights. “Labour’s Thornberry” have said nothing more than we should honour these commitments, to avoid a backlash against law abiding UK citizens living abroad. She has also said because those UK jihadists returning to the UK cannot be made stateless, they should be arrested and subjected to UK laws. For me they should be arrested for sedition. that is the overt conduct, such as speech and organisation, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend towards insurrection against the established order. Their use of the social media would be all the evidence needed for conviction and life sentence.

        • Holly

          So you agree with me that Labour’s Thornberry would not be doing anything other than sticking to the status quo.
          They would stick to the letter of the law.
          Unless that is, you have the misfortune of living in Rotherham, or any of the other places Labour bods went out of their way to completely ignore the law.
          She sat there shaking her head when it was said, ‘special circumstances’ could be implemented to stop these nutjobs from re entering the UK.
          She is typical of today’s Labour bods, lazy, cop out merchants who have put us all in peril, and who will continue to do so, because they are……. lazy cop out merchants.

          The title these nutjobs go under is, IS, so they will not be stateless.
          Some of them have even married and started a family, so they don’t seem to be suffering too much, and if they did decided to return, Labour would not stop them, and would allow their new spouse and children to return with them.
          Labour are quite mad.

          • Mynydd

            She said arrest them, that’s not the status quo. The present government have no idea what to do that’s the status quo.

            • Holly

              NOT ALLOWING THEM RE ENTRY is taking action.

              They left to fight AGAINST us (and that includes you) on their own accord.
              The courts will fight their arrest tooth and nail.
              European courts will win, and we will forever be looking over our shoulder, not the other way around.
              They HATE you, me, us.
              They do not quake in their boots about the law, they do not recognise our laws, and will ignore them.
              They do not fear death, so laws they do not recognise will not stop them from doing us great harm.
              You are concerning yourself from the wrong angle. You should be backing the government in trying to stop their returning to these shores.

              • Mynydd

                As of yet the government has no policy to stop them returning to our shores, so when they do come you lock them up, and throw away the keys which is possible under existing laws.

  • beenzrgud

    We shouldn’t have any boots on Iraqi or Syrian soil, but the skies over these areas should be swarming with our drones and fighter planes. I don’t want any of these savages returning to our shores.

    • ButcombeMan

      Try swarming over Syrias skies and you will get shot down

      • beenzrgud

        Who by?

        • ButcombeMan
          • beenzrgud

            Surely we could reach an agreement since we would be fighting a common enemy. I doubt Assad would want to take us on anyway since his airforce, etc. would surely suffer very significant losses against superior western weaponry and tactics. I seem to remember Saddam had lots of weapons, yet his forces were defeated in hours. To co-operate would be a win-win for both parties.

            • ButcombeMan

              Indeed that might be possible, that is the essential thrust of my first post on this thread.

              Isabel never mentioned it, presumably because she never thought of it.

              HMG has apparently ruled it out but then Cameron was wanting to be gung ho AGAINST Assad, not many months back and was stopped by the HoC.

              Cameron and the Foreign Office and Hague, have not been at all clever or on top of events.

              Having an alliance with Assad may be unpalatable to some, but my enemies enemy is often my friend, as they say. These are desperate times, we need desperate measures, at least we should not rule them out

              Assad has a powerful military. I would rather he was dealing with ISIS, than we were. If we can help him, we probably should.

              And Isabel never mentioned Iran either.

              Britain has not done well by interfering in Iraq.

              The UK used to pride itself on the quality of its political analysis.

              It was terrible under Blair, his actions were stupid maybe criminal and there is no sign for me that there is any more common sense in Cameron or the Foreign Office now..

          • Damaris Tighe

            Like they ‘shot down’ the Israeli planes that have bombed their nuclear plant & arms convoys (on way to Hezbollah) several times?
            Hint: all planes returned to base.

  • Tony_E

    Both Iraq and Syria are sovereign nations. They have standing armies, air forces. Why should it be the responsibility of the West to fight for their nations when they are failing to unite to fight for themselves?

    The biggest problem is that they have political leadership which does not unite the people or even the armed forces. All air strikes would do is shift the balance of power between one potential enemy and another. We have NO allies in the region. None.

  • asalord

    And if there is collateral damage? Well, it’s a price worth paying for a few extra votes.

  • Swiss Bob

    Is there a ‘nuke ’em from orbit’ option?

    • http://owsblog.blogspot.com Span Ows

      …an alien concept

  • goatmince

    Since when are a few Iraqi-kurdish goat herders from Slough or whateva news that fill a publication like this for weeks? Who gives a goats dump. Nuke ’em.

    • the viceroy’s gin

      …are you talking about your army of sockpuppets, lad?

  • anyfool

    This futile posturing about airstrikes in Iraq and Syria is probably the most sickening thing about the politicians and media groupies covering every slippery word that pours from their mouths.
    We have no interests worth a light in these two countries, we including the rest of NATO excepting the US, have no capability to destroy ISIL or whatever silly acronym you want to call a bunch of savages fighting a civil war in the dust bowl that masquerades as the Caliphate.
    Let them slaughter each other till their hearts content, anyone from a immigrant family “murdering their way through a gap year in their training for extending this poisonous Islamic ideology” in this country should be refused re-entry, their families should also be removed to wherever their original home was, they are not British, they are not European, it is like white people in Africa, they will never be Africans, in China they will never be Chinese, nor will they be Pakistani in Pakistan.
    You can write all you like about citizenship on a piece of paper, the writing will fade but human nature takes hundreds of years to change, if it actually changes at all.

    • Nan

      The problem is that their friends, such as the one who decapitated the elderly lady, are in your back garden with a machete and the ideology is coming here with fighters from ISIS. They’re also committing genocide and crimes against humanity, such as decapitating young children and putting their heads on spikes.

  • English Majority

    The solution:

    Arm the Kurd army, then we violently bomb Islamic State from above to clear the way for them to surge forwards and finish them off.

    • Damaris Tighe

      If I had to choose between Assad & IS I’d choose Assad any day. He’s no threat to us, unlike IS. Stuff an ethical foreign policy, let’s ally with Assad against IS & get the job done.

      • English Majority

        Fully agree, D.

      • http://owsblog.blogspot.com Span Ows

        Yes, the western powers decision to try to take on Assad (and thankfully totally unsupported – for obvious reasons – by nearly everyone) was very odd. I am still not sure WTF they were on.

  • Rhoda Klapp8

    Ought we, as a nation, be opposed to radical Islam? Not just this group or that, tied up in regional or local politics or sectarianism, but jihadists who declare that ambition whenever and wherever they are? Because they are at war with us. They should be dealt with on the lines of the old piracy laws. Non-state groups using violent methods without regard for borders are not easily dealt with by criminal law through the courts.

    • Nan

      All Islam is radical islam, don’t let them fool you. The Koran endorses lying to the kuffar (that’s us).

      • Damaris Tighe

        I’ve just learned that one of the 99 names of al*ah is ‘The Great Deceiver’. Divine sanction for lying.

  • English Majority

    Take out the Muslim/black/other immigrant share of the poll, and you’re left with an even bigger majority.

    The vast majority of actual English people support violent aerial bombardment of ISIS.

    We don’t have to put any of our soldiers at risk.

    We can just literally bomb ISIS into body parts from above.

    They MUST be stopped.

    • Nicholas I

      They’re most likely run by jewstan and ZOGUSA. Certainly they were initially armed and funded by the US, Qatar and the Saudis in Syria.

  • Colonel Mustard

    Can we afford them? Do we have the aircraft and pilots – not just in terms of numbers but in terms of sustainability?

    How much of Cameron’s evasiveness is down to the fact that he knows the reality of where his bean counter’s reduction in Defence capability has brought the RAF? (so that he could boast about how much foreign aid he is hosing abroad and keep funding the fake charities campaigning against his government).

    The RAF had 33 fighter squadrons in 1990, 17 in 2003 and now 8. The Libyan missions required a mustering of pilots from instructing positions and brought potential fatiguing issues from sustained operations as well as implications for air defence of the UK. It’s on a shoestring. Everyone knows it but they are still pretending.

    In the 14th Century Christine de Pizan asked “What will the wise prince do when he must undertake wars and fight battles? First of all, he will consider how much strength he has or can obtain, how many men are available and how much money. For unless he is well supplied with these two basic elements, it is folly to wage war, for they are necessary to have above all else, especially money.”

    When it comes to his responsibilities for the defence of the realm and our global presence in military terms Cameron is a fool.

    • Damaris Tighe

      For decades governments have placed security at home & abroad lower in the hierarchy of needs than thought/speech crimes, bribing favoured sections of the electorate with welfare, & GDP.

      • Colonel Mustard

        The small-minded parochialism of it beggars belief. Nation State to Primary School in just 25 years.

      • chouenlai

        I certainly agree with that.

        “Its Tommy this and Tommy that and Tommy mind your soul, but its the thin red line of ‘eroes when the drums begin to role”.

    • chouenlai

      Well of course on this blog you lot think everything Cameron says and does make him a fool. Now then, the Labour party which according to 98% of commentators on here is no worse than the Tories, left a £39 billion black hole in defence spending in 2010. What was Cameron or anyone else supposed to do with that tiny issue? I am an ex Royal Engineer, my son is a serving officer in the British Army, nobody on the planet is more proud of the British armed forces than I, nobody would be less likely to cut defence spending than I. What would you have done? Closed 25 hospitals? Reduced the state pension?
      For christ sake, be UKIP if you must, but be reasonable.

      • Colonel Mustard

        “Well of course on this blog you lot think everything Cameron says and does make him a fool.”

        No, but this does make him look a fool.

        “…nobody would be less likely to cut defence spending than I. What would you have done?”

        Why does it always have to be hospitals and pensions? Which part of foreign aid and fake charities did you not understand?

        He spent £11 billion on aid and £13 billion on subsidising charities that (mainly) oppose and campaign against his government. Is that not the very definition of foolish?

        “For christ sake, be UKIP if you must, but be reasonable.”

        I am not UKIP and in light of the facts laid out it seems Cameron is the one being unreasonable. Sometimes I think he just forgets what he has previously said or promised and seems to think that government policy can be compartmentalised without being joined up. So, plenty of borrowed money to throw abroad and fund fake charities but none when it comes to the RAF.

        I don’t buy that and neither should you.

        • chouenlai

          I would really like to see some figures regarding “fake” charities. £13billion sounds like a great deal. I happen to know a young chap who advises Cameron on charities, that kind of money sounds somewhat different to his conversations with me.

          As for foreign aide, I am a believer in it. Just so long as it means we are keeping friends in very unfriendly locations.
          It can be cheaper than war or “Police actions”.

          • Colonel Mustard

            It’s actually closer to £14 billion but they do a good job of hiding it. The NCVO reported that cuts in government funding to the UK’s charities were 9% or in real terms £1.3 billion.

            Government contracts with charities fell £500m from £11.6bn to £11.1bn in cash terms from 2010/11 to 2011/12. Adjusted for inflation, the real terms fall was nearly £900m, from £12bn
            to £11.1bn. Government grants fell £300m from £2.9bn to £2.6bn in cash terms; just over £400m in real terms, from £3bn to £2.6bn.

            You do the math.

          • Colonel Mustard

            “As for foreign aide, I am a believer in it. Just so long as it means we are keeping friends in very unfriendly locations.
            It can be cheaper than war or “Police actions”.”

            Ok, let’s look at that. Where is there any evidence of how foreign aid is measured for cost effectiveness? Where is there even any proper scrutiny of how the money is spent? You can believe it in by all means, just as some believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden, but when it comes to quantifying the benefits against the cost and disadvantages to other parts of the budget there is nothing to be seen other than the usual clichéd platitudes.

            • chouenlai

              One no more sees a breakdown of foreign aid than NHS, Defence or any other major expense. I have not the slightest doubt that there is massive misspending and utter waste. The finest examples of this kind of thing has always been defence. Especially under the last Labour government.

              • Colonel Mustard

                Cameron has had more than four years to get a grip. He came into a government where any amount of savage reduction could have been justified. But he continued to spend borrowed money with just a few tweaks here and there and some seriously stupid decisions:-

                1. Cutting defence to the bone while the UK was still engaging in overseas military commitments
                2. Inventing the “bedroom tax” by which his enemies now attack him
                3. Preserving Labour’s unelected shadow government and their funding and then, incredibly, defending the worst examples of it – Nicholson and Smith.
                4. Starting internal wars he didn’t have to with equal marriage.

                There is much more but I really can’t be bothered. For the Conservatives the man is a walking disaster.

                • chouenlai

                  I am sorry I do not understand number 3 at all.
                  The bedroom tax; Why should some old lady be living alone in a 4 bed council house for a peppercorn rent when people are homeless? If people want the luxury of deciding on their accommodation arrangements, buy your own house.
                  Gay Marriage, well the socialists are all for it, the LD’s make it compulsory, do we want to look so bigoted and old fashioned by being the only party against it. I, like most Tories of my age group am not crazy about it, however, my two married hetrosexual children have a very different view on the matter.

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Yes, but the point is not what it was but how the government’s enemies were able to spin it – and still do. The savings were/are by all accounts risible (and disputed) and have had knock on consequences. It just wasn’t worth it because it also reinforced the ‘nasty party’ nonsense.

                  Cameron starts unnecessary battles he can’t win or which he wins but make the Tories look bad. Then he runs miles from the ones he should really be fighting. He takes on UKIP instead of the Labour party. Duh!

                  I’m sorry, I voted for him in 2010 because I believed his promises, but I have come to the sad conclusion that he is just a very stupid and weak man but stubborn and arrogant with it. An unfortunate combination in any “leader”.

            • Nan

              The UN seems to be a money-grabbing organization that does the most good for those it employs rather than those it claims to help; it’s very pro-Muslim and it’s the West ponying up most of the cash. None of the Middle Eastern countries are listed in the top donors; the top 5 are US, Japan, Germany, France and UK for a combined 50% and because none of its schemes seem to benefit the countries they claim they’re helping, we should stop giving.

        • Iain Hill

          Let’s hope he realises we are bankrupt and saves lives! How many of the writers would go personally, instead of sending young Britons to their deaths, as well as many thousands over there. Grow up, this is not Dan Dare!

          • Colonel Mustard

            And you should RTFP. I was commenting on the capability to launch air strikes not endorsing them.

            Don’t you dare tell me to grow up or sneer Dan Dare when I was serving this country up the sharp end when you were probably still smearing baby food over your face in a high chair.

      • Chris Morriss

        Start by stopping all overseas aid, except for the short-term aid after natural (Acts of God) disasters.

    • WatTylersGhost

      Maybe it is a bit too much to ask, but before we jump into another war in Iraq, maybe David Cameron would have the courtesy to allow the British people to see the report into the last disastrous war in that country.

      PUBLISH CHILCOT NOW.

  • ButcombeMan

    Hmmm. Isabel.

    No mention of our deciding that ISIS cannot in fact BE truly beaten unless we work with Assad, however unpalatable that might be?

    Something HMG seems to have already ruled out.

    We have Ukraine, ISIS and Ebola plus the dysfunctional EU.

    The response of the world leaders and Cameron, is in my view inadequate to all of these issues.

    Of course Obama is a lame duck and it shows.

    • Adam Carter

      The dysfunctional EU.
      There are criminals at Calais attempting to forcibly board British ferries, and the mayor of Calais, a town in our EU ‘partner’ country France, is threatening illegal action *and* blaming the UK.
      There are a lot of crises at present.
      We need to do 2 things fast:
      Start vigorous religious profiling of people seeking to come into the UK, including returning residents.
      Get out of the EU so that the UK is in control of our own borders.

    • chouenlai

      But Farage would take it his stride of course.

      • ButcombeMan

        You are now being silly.

        Farage would at least have us out of dysfunctional Europe.

        • chouenlai

          And Cameron is not a one man band as Farage is.

          • the viceroy’s gin

            …is Dave even a man, for that matter?

  • http://owsblog.blogspot.com Span Ows

    Air strikes fine. Even some SF seek and destroy missions but what will the government do about the very clear and present danger of that battlefield coming home: what provisions are in place at the borders? Have all Muslim border personnel been vetted enough? What profiles of returning Muslims be used or will white grannies be stopped and searched while be-burka-ed hoards stroll through? Will some/any/all be detained for in depth questioning? Will know ‘persons of interest’ be tagged/tailed?

    • Graeme S

      Muslim border personnel vetted // you aving a larf ………. just go to luton or heathrow airport

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here