Arguments for and against the UK joining the strikes on ISIS in Syria

[BashfulAnthony]

Yeah, hope it's sooner, because what we need to oppose the Tories is Tories in red...

O.

We need an intelligen bunch, with the needs of the country at heart, not just MP's playing the Westminster Game;  and somebody who can deal in the real world.

[Outrider]

We need an intelligen bunch, with the needs of the country at heart, not just MP's playing the Westminster Game;  and somebody who can deal in the real world.

And you think the Labour party right-wingers are 'equipped to deal in the real world'? You don't think they're MPs playing the Westminster Game whilst they vote for vengeance strikes in the middle East to try to appeal to Daily Mail readers out for blood and try to engineer the downfall of their own leader because he has the temerity to actually represent the Labour party membership?

Maybe you have a different understanding of 'The Westminster Game' to me...

O.

[BashfulAnthony]

And you think the Labour party right-wingers are 'equipped to deal in the real world'? You don't think they're MPs playing the Westminster Game whilst they vote for vengeance strikes in the middle East to try to appeal to Daily Mail readers out for blood and try to engineer the downfall of their own leader because he has the temerity to actually represent the Labour party membership?

Maybe you have a different understanding of 'The Westminster Game' to me...

O.

I'm not suggesting the Labour right-wingers are to be espoused. I think the whole Party is inept at present; and especially the dinosaur Corbyn and his lackeys.   The whole Party needs a complete overhaul and re-think.

I quite understand what the "Westminster Game" is. I don't need any lessons from you.

[Shaker]

If he's such a dinosaur why did he trounce his fellow candidates in the leadership election with such a thumping majority and why have upwards of 50,000 people joined Labour in the couple of months since he won?

[BashfulAnthony]

If he's such a dinosaur why did he trounce his fellow candidates in the leadership election with such a thumping majority and why have upwards of 50,000 people joined Labour in the couple of months since he won?

Because, old chap, he isn't the only dinosaur left from the Kinnock era;  just as there are plenty of Thatcherites left from those dismal times ( Cameron, Osborne, et al.).  Not much of a position to espouse,  to say there isn't just one idiot abroad, but thousands!

[Shaker]

I was wrong to say that 50,000 new members have joined Labour since Corbyn was elected and I withdraw that remark.

Apparently it's over 60,000 - 183,000 since May over all

[BashfulAnthony]

I was wrong to say that 50,000 new members have joined Labour since Corbyn was elected and I withdraw that remark.

Apparently it's over 60,000 - 183,000 since May over all

Funny:  all these staunch Labourites seem to have been missing in the Election (just six months ago.), when Labour was trounced.  Guess it's just a few sillies, jumping on the band-wagon; but for how long.  Thursday will tell is something about how things really are.

[Shaker]

Funny:  all these staunch Labourites seem to have been missing in the Election (just six months ago.), when Labour was trounced.

Probably because nobody wanted Wallace out of off of Wallace and Gromit as PM. Except him.

[BashfulAnthony]

Probably because nobody wanted Wallace out of off of Wallace and Gromit as PM. Except him.

Miliband didn't exactly help;  but despite a lame duck like him, there wasn't enough support to keep out the unctuous Cameron and co.

I haven't time for any of them.

[Outrider]

Funny:  all these staunch Labourites seem to have been missing in the Election (just six months ago.), when Labour was trounced.  Guess it's just a few sillies, jumping on the band-wagon; but for how long.  Thursday will tell is something about how things really are.

Couldn't possibly be because the Labour party of the time wasn't actually representing them, could it? Couldn't possibly be that there's a significant gap between the majority of the proto-Tory parliamentary body of the Labour party and the bulk of their popular membership?

O.

[jakswan]

Which principle does he think is more immediately important - not killing bystanders in Syria, or not supporting open democracy here.

Does he tell representatives to ignore their own sentiment? He tried to encourage them to listen to their electorate; not all representatives think that they are there to parrot their constituency, some think that they have been elected for their capacity to make informed decisions on their behalf and should follow their own conscience.

He's between a rock and a hard place on this one, at least this way next time an issue comes around he'll still have a labour cabinet to try to work with. He loses this particular battle - which was going to happen anyway - but still has the possibility of winning future ones, rather than losing this one anyway and not having a force to stand up at the next.

I am curious as to why so many of the current Labour front-benchers are remaining in place, given the apparent disjunction between the intention of the broader membership and their own views.

O.

Labour are supposed to be a government in waiting, the cabinet take collective responsibility. Corbyn could have forced those that oppose him out, he bottled it.

[jakswan]

I was wrong to say that 50,000 new members have joined Labour since Corbyn was elected and I withdraw that remark.

Apparently it's over 60,000 - 183,000 since May over all

There is a view that there exists many in the UK that are as far left as Corbyn. How many though?

If the Oldham seat goes you should have a clearer indication.

[Shaker]

There is a view that there exists many in the UK that are as far left as Corbyn. How many though?

Far left? Bloody hell. It's coming to something when ideals that historically Labour stood for and that earned them a landslide election win in 1945 are now described as "far left." I think anybody of that mind has had their brain addled by Blair and his decaffeinated Thatcherite, Noddy version of a Labour Party.

Instead of thinking in terms of "far left" perhaps it's more likely that people are anti-austerity, anti the denigration and persecution of the sick and disabled, anti another pointless skirmish far away causing innumerable deaths, and so on.

[Outrider]

Labour are supposed to be a government in waiting, the cabinet take collective responsibility. Corbyn could have forced those that oppose him out, he bottled it.

I think that's the sort of confrontation they want - as party leader, that sort of infighting hurts his image more than theirs. He could have forced them, but he then risks them stepping down - I don't know if he feels there aren't enough competent left wingers in the party to step up or if he feels he needs the 'big names' in his cabinet.

O.

[jakswan]

Far left? Bloody hell. It's coming to something when ideals that historically Labour stood for and that earned them a landslide election win in 1945 are now described as "far left." I think anybody of that mind has had their brain addled by Blair and his decaffeinated Thatcherite, Noddy version of a Labour Party.

Instead of thinking in terms of "far left" perhaps it's more likely that people are anti-austerity, anti the denigration and persecution of the sick and disabled, anti another pointless skirmish far away causing innumerable deaths, and so on.

Bloody hell its coming to something when people can't understand that left and right are terms that are relative to the time that they are used. Some start tribally grandstanding if someone suggestions they occupy a position they do actually occupy.

Lets try again, I think Corbyn's supporters are many, is it enough to win an election?

Now I don't want to stand in the middle whilst the extreme right shout at the extreme left that they are a bunch of tree hugging pacifists, and the extreme left shout at the extreme right they are a bunch of toffs only interested in themselves.

I last voted LibDem (yes me and 3 others), I have in the past voted Cons and Labour so I'm the typical sort of voter Corbyn has to win over. I admire Corbyn, a nice man, who has principles but I couldn't vote for him, for many reasons but one of the reasons is that he doesn't seem to have the support of his party.

[jakswan]

I think that's the sort of confrontation they want - as party leader, that sort of infighting hurts his image more than theirs. He could have forced them, but he then risks them stepping down - I don't know if he feels there aren't enough competent left wingers in the party to step up or if he feels he needs the 'big names' in his cabinet.

I think he is safe for now, I suppose if he genuinely wants to create a 'new politics' then perhasp he wants all sides of the party to be represented on the front bench maybe.

He must know the knives are being sharpened for him though!

[Nearly Sane]

A loss in Oldham following on from a revolt of 60+ and I don't think he is safe. The problem was though that the alternative when it looked like they were the abstention party would be as damaging in a different way. Corbyn can't lead the PLP, no one else can lead the membership.


This was always going to be a stopgap until they sat down and tried to answer what they are for. The problem they will have is that the leadership is now only a job a mad person would go for.


The only pitch that I can see for the next leader, is to say the 2020 election is gone but commit to a complete policy and organisation change which in the short term will seek to use all legal means to stop the excesses of Tory policy (note whether you believe it is excessive doesn't really matter, it's the only option they have). Stop offering all policy,offer only opposition. It's not a million miles away from what Blair did but it is a lightyear away from the circs Blair did it in.

[Hope]

I find the latest suggestion that the Government are 'rushing to war' to be a bit daft.  We've been at war with ISIS for a couple of years already.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Me,

Is it reason enough to join in with air strikes that we show solidarity with France?

If what happened in Paris had taken place in London, Glasgow, Birmingham, would we be sending in air strikes? would we be asking France to join us?

Air strikes are the wee guy with his finger in the dyke, air strikes and be damned, well I think we are already damned.

Vive la France, Vive la solidarité.

Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord, nope sorry big man I think we have dibs on that now

Gonnagle.

[Hope]

Dear Me,

Is it reason enough to join in with air strikes that we show solidarity with France?

Hi Gonners, I thought that we've showing solidarity with France for several months.  After all, we are already involved in the air strikes - both of Iraq and Syria.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Hope,

Hi Gonners, I thought that we've showing solidarity with France for several months.  After all, we are already involved in the air strikes - both of Iraq and Syria.

Well I did say we are already damned.

Gonnagle.

[BashfulAnthony]

Couldn't possibly be because the Labour party of the time wasn't actually representing them, could it? Couldn't possibly be that there's a significant gap between the majority of the proto-Tory parliamentary body of the Labour party and the bulk of their popular membership?

O

Time will tell.  Oldham, on Thursday, may give an inkling of how Labour supporters are viewing things.  There is something like a 16,000 Labour majority there.  So they ought to at least maintain that lead, if not increase it, if Corbyn is having any effect.

[jakswan]

A loss in Oldham following on from a revolt of 60+ and I don't think he is safe. The problem was though that the alternative when it looked like they were the abstention party would be as damaging in a different way. Corbyn can't lead the PLP, no one else can lead the membership.

This was always going to be a stopgap until they sat down and tried to answer what they are for. The problem they will have is that the leadership is now only a job a mad person would go for.

The only pitch that I can see for the next leader, is to say the 2020 election is gone but commit to a complete policy and organisation change which in the short term will seek to use all legal means to stop the excesses of Tory policy (note whether you believe it is excessive doesn't really matter, it's the only option they have). Stop offering all policy,offer only opposition. It's not a million miles away from what Blair did but it is a lightyear away from the circs Blair did it in.

I think in the UK there is active vocal support from as far left as Corbyn. They are miffed because Blair went to the centre and they don't feel represented. Elections are won in the centre, so I think what ought to happen is that the hardcore need to decide if a Centre left party is better than Tory and they won't be represented, or, that representation is more important than power.

I think if the Centre Labour politicians broke away they could mount a challenge to the Tories.

They could always go centre and talk left like the SNP, need some discipline and a very good leader to do that though.

[Nearly Sane]

I find the latest suggestion that the Government are 'rushing to war' to be a bit daft.  We've been at war with ISIS for a couple of years already.

I sort of agree - we are bombing them but we are not at war. At the same time, the govt are implying we aren't bombing them.

[jeremyp]

Labour are supposed to be a government in waiting, the cabinet take collective responsibility. Corbyn could have forced those that oppose him out, he bottled it.

I was half way through writing a post that refuted you, but I actually talked myself into agreeing with you.

I think the perception is that he had to "bottle it". If half the cabinet resigned, it would be spun as the collapse of the party.

Corbyn doesn't have the backing of the parliamentary party otherwise he would have told the cabinet to follow his lead or get out. Then he could replace them with people that align better with his views. He can't do that because the parliamentary party won't follow him. The only way to change that is to cull the right wing MPs and bring in more people on the left. That can't happen before the next general election and it will be a veritable bloodbath if he does it and the parliamentary party would be too damaged in the lead up to the election to be effective.