Isis: Majority of British people do not support air strikes against Syria

[Vergennes]

Isis: Majority of British people do not support air strikes against Syria | UK Politics | News | The Independent
-
What's your opinion guys ?

@mike2000 is back @Steve781 @Abingdonboy @waz @Atanz @Blue Marlin

 

[waz]

Isis: Majority of British people do not support air strikes against Syria | UK Politics | News | The Independent
-
What's your opinion guys ?

@mike2000 is back @Steve781 @Abingdonboy @waz @Atanz @Blue Marlin

People are scared and rightly so. The chaos of the EU's open borders has meant hundreds of people have come through on trucks, ships etc undetected. Although the bulk have been stopped and arrested, the country simply does not know if the bad guys have got through. There is also a chance of a homegrown attack, from some crazed Islamist. The UK has however worked well to take out anyone pondering that route, and MI5 work well with the Muslim community (informers, intelligence gathering, monitoring etc).
The thing is, essentially this is what ISIS wants i.e. less countries involved, populations living in fear. The fight should be taken to them.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

it's probably beginning to hurt

 

[livingdead]

I think ISIS should be allowed to govern the land they have occupied(sunni majority area), just like hamas does. As long as they promise not to push further(may be UN backed forces can enforce that), nobody need to fight against them.
With all their brutality and barbarism, ISIS has territorial ambition, which means they will one day sit across table and talk(unlike AQ for example who are anarchist by nature).

And I dont think UK's defence lies in ME, it lies at home, they should strengthen domestic security and border forces.

 

[Blue Marlin]

go for it at god speed, but keep it quiet as nut jobs here may do somthing stupid reminisant of the paris attacks.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Isis: Majority of British people do not support air strikes against Syria | UK Politics | News | The Independent
-
What's your opinion guys ?

@mike2000 is back @Steve781 @Abingdonboy @waz @Atanz @Blue Marlin

Who did the survey in the first place?
Moreover, a small sample of a county's population doesn't in anyway means the whole country thinks the same. Anyway as I said before, the public doesn't in anyway makes a country's foreign policy . They might influence it, but the main decision at the end of the day lies with the leaders and MPs in our case. So if and when our MPs authorise our forces to intervene in Syria (which I'm sure they will),then we will intervene , whether a small proportion of the public is against it or not .

I think ISIS should be allowed to govern the land they have occupied(sunni majority area), just like hamas does. As long as they promise not to push further(may be UN backed forces can enforce that), nobody need to fight against them.
With all their brutality and barbarism, ISIS has territorial ambition, which means they will one day sit across table and talk(unlike AQ for example who are anarchist by nature).

And I dont think UK's defence lies in ME, it lies at home, they should strengthen domestic security and border forces.

Let's Leave ISIS alone huh? Good plan you got there.

 

[livingdead]

Who did the survey in the first place?
Moreover, a small sample of a county's population doesn't in anyway means the whole country thinks the same. Anyway as I said before, the public doesn't in anyway makes a country's foreign policy . They might influence it, but the main decision at the end of the day lies with the leaders and MPs in our case. So if and when our MPs authorise our forces to intervene in Syria (which I'm sure they will),then we will intervene , whether a small proportion of the public is against it or not .



Let's Leave ISIS alone huh? Good plan you got there.

yeah, whats wrong. You dont like them, they dont like you, so no need to visit each other's house.

 

[mike2000 is back]

yeah, whats wrong. You dont like them, they dont like you, so no need to visit each other's house.

Lool so you think Great Britain not intervening in Syria against ISIS will stop them from targeting Britain ?? Lool I can't really believe how naive some people are.
They killed a Chinese and Norwegian hostage in Syria. What has china and Norway ever done to them??

 

[Indus Pakistan]

opinion

At a personal level I am against any involvement in this "snake pit" for the simple reason that nine out ten times you end up triggering blowback down the road. History since the Afghanistan Operation Cyclone is replete with unintended consequences. However I would support UK airstrikes if France made strong request. It is important to demonstrate that UK stands behind it's friends.

On the wider question of getting involved I believe you should either not get involved at all or if you do you must go into the enterprise 100% invested. Also we need to have clear frame of referance and clear end defined goal. Just to go in to vent some anger and muck around is not advisable.

There are lot of contradictions in this. For example those animals who went around shooting in Paris recently, or those heathens who were behind the Hebdo incident represent a strain of thinking that is cultivated and nurtured and exported in Saudia Arabia. This is fact. It is most definitely not sourced from the secular Alawite regime in Damascus. Assad and his wife are more cut out for a stroll along the Champs Elysees then is the neanderthal kings of Saudia Arabia.

However despite the complex nature of the situation if France wants help then so be it - "bonne chasse".

 

[UKBengali]

Lool so you think Great Britain not intervening in Syria against ISIS will stop them from targeting Britain ?? Lool I can't really believe how naive some people are.
They killed a Chinese and Norwegian hostage in Syria. What has china and Norway ever done to them??

They may have suspected that they were spies.

ISIS specifically mentioned the bombing by France as a reason for the Paris attacks.

UK bombing of ISIS will inevitably make it more likely that ISIS will want to attack the UK - only way to reduce the threat is to go in with ground troops.

Go all the way or stay out completely.

 

[Penguin]

Isis: Majority of British people do not support air strikes against Syria | UK Politics | News | The Independent
-
What's your opinion guys ?

@mike2000 is back @Steve781 @Abingdonboy @waz @Atanz @Blue Marlin

Isis: Majority of British people do not support air strikes against Syria
The survey showed 59 per cent people believe air strikes will increase terrorist attacks

A new poll has revealed the majority of British people still do not support bombing Isis in Syria, despite David Cameron setting out his case for military action this week.

The survey conducted for the Daily Mirror by Survation showed 59 per cent of people believed sending warplanes to bomb key Isis targets in the war-torn country will increase the risk of terrorist attacks in the UK.

While 48 per cent of people said they backed air raids on the extremists, but 30 per cent want Britain to stay away and a further 21 per cent are undecided.

Misleading title

Actually the majority (48%) does back the air raids, with 30% wanting Britain to stay away and 21% undecided.
While 59 per cent of people believed sending warplanes to bomb key Isis targets in the war-torn country will increase the risk of terrorist attacks in the UK, the majority still supports bombings.

Less than half the country supports his plan to bomb IS strongholds as early as next Tuesday - with the rest opposed or undecided.

48% back British air raids on the extremists, contrasted with 30% who want the RAF to stay out of the fight, and 21% who don’t know.

But an overwhelming majority - 59% believe sending Tornado warplanes into action over Syria will increase the risk of terrorists inflicting carnage in the UK.

Actual question

Actual Question

Actual QUestion

David Cameron fails to convince public to back strikes against ISIS in Syria - Mirror Online

 

[Indus Pakistan]

While 59 per cent of people believed sending warplanes to bomb key Isis targets in the war-torn country will increase the risk of terrorist attacks in the UK, the majority still supports bombings.

Sums up my sentiment exactly.

 

[Indika]

think ISIS should be allowed to govern the land they have occupied(sunni majority area), just like hamas does. As long as they promise not to push further(may be UN backed forces can enforce that), nobody need to fight against them.
With all their brutality and barbarism, ISIS has territorial ambition, which means they will one day sit across table and talk(unlike AQ for example who are anarchist by nature).

Thats atrocious mate, ISIS are blood thirsty monsters. Its not that they are after power only but also indulging in gross civil rights abuse. To think that they will reform if they are left alone is nonsense. It will only embolden them to pursue their aggrandizement further.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Go all the way or stay out completely.

Yes. Agree 100%. Don't get involved but if you do stir the hornets nest then wipe the damn thing from existance. Russian sorting of the Chechen issue and cleansing of Grozny is prime example of going in and getting the thing sorted out even if it is ugly. At least at the end of it you can look at a future.

Not go in, muck around and leave the problem to fester. It is like what doctors say when they give you antibiotics. Complete the course so the infection is wiped out. If you don't go the full course the germs build immunity and come back twicer stronger.

 

[rockstar08]

People are scared and rightly so.

they are not Scared but got their lesson after what happen in Iraq ... there is no need for UK to get involved . those countries who are already bombing ISIS are more than enough .. what EU and UK failed to understand that American wants them to go against ISIS and the backlash will make Europeans mad on middle east .. their failed policies over the time has make their own People so pissed off ..