Corbyn opposes Syrian air strikes

This isn’t really a big surprise, but the BBC reports that Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn opposes proposals for UK airstrikes in Syria and prefers a “comprehensive negoriated political settlement”.

How that could be started let alone achieved is not explained.

cuwvknewuaa-avf

BBC: Jeremy Corbyn ‘cannot support air strikes’

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has written to his MPs to say he cannot support the prime minister’s proposals for air strikes against IS targets in Syria.

But Mr Corbyn’s intervention puts him on a collision course with his shadow cabinet, half of whom are thought to support action.

Shadow Foreign Secretary Hillary Benn told BBC News he found the case for strikes “compelling”.

David Cameron is trying to convince MPs action would make Britain’s “safer”.

He will hold a Commons vote if he thinks he can win it, possibly as early as next week.

I’m not a fan of bombing and killing generally, but there seems little option but to fight ISIS in Syria and Iraq, to reduce their indiscriminate and barbaric killings.

Previous Post
Leave a comment

55 Comments

  1. kiwi guy

     /  27th November 2015

    Arial bombing isn’t sufficient because they just burrow down.

    Arial bombing destroys infrastructure sending a country back to the stone age – eg Iraq.

    Arial bombing sends more muslim refugees our way – this is ok with Pete because Diveristy(TM), Multiculturalism(TM) gives him a hard on.

    Reply
    • Nup! I no longer believe you’re “for real” KG.
      One needn’t even respond to your inanities and those three ‘support’ pictures.
      “Self-evidently, I rest my case”. I don’t even need to make the case!
      You’re a left-wing, liberal socialist, propounding the extreme opposite, right?
      Like counter-espionage?
      Do you have another pseudonym expounding your real position? Arguing against yourself?
      I shall henceforth treat you as a friend and ally.
      Aerial bombing is the perfect ISIS recruitment tool. Worked a treat for Pol-Pot in Cambodia.
      As for Jeremy Corbyn, “Ye shall hear a lone voice crying in the wilderness”
      Perhaps not alone though, here’s John Pilger –
      “Across the world, from Northern Ireland to Nepal, those regarding each other as terrorists and heretics have faced each other across a table. Why not now in Iraq and Syria? Instead, there is a vapid, almost sociopathic verboseness from Cameron, Hollande, Obama and their “coalition of the willing” as they prescribe more violence delivered from 30,000 feet on places where the blood of previous adventures never dried”
      ψ

      Reply
      • traveller

         /  27th November 2015

        How does Pilger find the energy and commitment to contort every argument to fit his unwavering narrative and arrive at his foregone conclusion every time? You know, the same old chestnut he’s been trotskying out for decades. All Western, secular civilization and democratic states = BAD. Everywhere else – dictatorships, caliphates, terrorist states, countries of medieval religious law, polygamy, women as chattels, little to no education, female circumcision, no hope of a vote etc = GOOD.

        There is a profound disconnect between the post colonial/anti-imperialism/racist West belief he holds and the way he always applies that ideology to every point of conflict in the Non West. We’re to blame for everything! I think that the “West as post colonialist/Racist” is responsible for everything is not only wrong but it’s patronising to the Third World. Many of Pilger’s ilk are so steeped in the whole “we feel your outrage even when you don’t!” they believe they need him as their constant champion. The whole “White Man’s Guilt” is now so pervasive within OUR own political systems and secular tolerance that it greatly impedes effective action enabling escalation. Having grown up watching how the Western left movement has turned anti-Semite and pretty well embraced pan Islamism, I cannot trust a man like Pilger not to colour and imbue all argument in this manner, and cannot be convinced he’s right here either.

        There’s a line in the sand here. Nothing about ISIS is right, nothing. They;re not going anywhere and good Syrian citizens are not returning to their homes without action. Greater strategists and military minds than mine will determine the action taken. However, continuing to stand by seemingly paralysed isn’t right. Tutting about how we got it wrong in Iraq while a rag tag bunch of religious madmen slaughter in their own backyard, demand caliphacy in the name of Allah and change the face of Europe cannot be allowed.

        Sitting across the table from these men will NOT work.

        Reply
        • That is Pilger’s problem – he opposed the Khmer rouge not because they were vile genocidal communist extremists but because the US were using them to combat the Vietnamese. If they were allied with the appropriate people, he probably wouldn’t have cared.

          Reply
        • Okay, I accept you are a real one. This is how I see it.
          It looks just like a cohesive, intelligent argument. Let’s scratch it and see.
          Problem: If I say “Judaism is good” I am NOT therefore saying “Islam is bad” or “All other religions are bad” or ANY SUCH THING. I am saying, “I think Judaism is good” and I might say “for these reasons, for instance, Monotheism”
          The rest of what you say, I’m afraid, is ‘projection’ based on an incorrect fundamental assumption. Positive X = Negative Y. ‘Fraid not, sorry.
          There’s not a word in Pilger’s article defending or justifying the actions of terrorists.
          I think he’s attempting to explain their origins and evident historical escalation.
          The more we bomb them, the worse they get.
          I think we all benefit from his incisive analysis even if we don’t like it.
          You’d do as well as any military strategist Traveller. Apply for the job now.
          Reason: There has never EVER been a military strategist who’s won a war which has not resulted in another war. Or, put another way, a militarist who has ever won, full stop. What they’ve done is make a ‘killing’, a shitload of money in the meantime, in the killing.

          Reply
          • traveller

             /  27th November 2015

            What do you and Pilger suggest? Meaningful dialogue. How will that talk across the table with men who believe everyone is inferior, infidel and who routinely decapitate innocents go?

            Reply
            • “from Northern Ireland to Nepal, those regarding each other as terrorists and heretics have faced each other across a table. Why not now in Iraq and Syria?” – John Pilger.
              If routes for the shipment of weapons and supplies exist, bet your life avenues of communication exist too.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  27th November 2015

            I give you Churchill. Obviously you prefer Chamberlain.

            Reply
            • Kevin

               /  27th November 2015

              To be fair Chamberlain didn’t have much of a choice as Britain was not prepared for war. What he did was give Britain time.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  27th November 2015

              Whose fault was it that Britain was not prepared for war? If I recall correctly Churchill had been warning for some time.

            • Churchill for me…

            • I know, let’s turn into a sideroad. A blind alley to boot. Churchill the inebriate vs Chamberlain the appeaser.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  28th November 2015

              “There has never EVER been a military strategist who’s won a war which has not resulted in another war. Or, put another way, a militarist who has ever won, full stop.”

              Churchill refuted that. You merely blather as usual in response.

            • “Churchill refuted that”. Really? Is that why his mate Stalin turned on him within weeks of Nazi Germany’s defeat, resulting in Cold War tensions that truly imperiled the world for 30+ years? Along with myriad local conflicts? Do you seriously think the ‘Malayan emergency’ (et al) wasn’t a direct result of WW2?
              But to return to your original question. You are correct.
              You give me Warmonger and I prefer Peacemaker.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  28th November 2015

              Churchill never regarded either the Russians or the Americans as his mates. Malaya was affected by the Japanese in WW2, not the Germans.

              I’ll take Churchill, you’ll get Hitler. There are times when war is the only option for survival.

            • Pete Kane

               /  28th November 2015

              Churchill (but without the Dardanelles).

    • Kevin

       /  27th November 2015

      No one’s saying we should be bombing cities. Bombing ISIS strongholds on the other hand …

      Reply
  2. Timoti

     /  27th November 2015

    Lets bite the bullet ( bad cliché). There’s only one way to do this. To finish it fast and get back into our normal routine of just being worried about being bombed in or own cities.
    Boots on ground. Start at point A, finish at point B. The Geneva Convention will be suspended . Where possible Isis fighters will have pork stuffed in their mouth and told they will be sent to Allah unclean. That means the virgins won’t be interested.. That would be more devastating to these barbarians than the tap to the head that would follow shortly after.

    Reply
    • “finish it fast” this has been said before, many times. Pilger is on the money with this issue and his latest article (“The blood never dried”) is brilliant analysis.

      Reply
      • Timoti

         /  27th November 2015

        I was talking of Isis as a military force in Syria. I pay no attention to Pilger who is a lying
        Leftwing toerag. He’s been caught out many times.

        Reply
        • For my part I like him because he can take a Long View / Big Picture look at things.

          Reply
          • Timoti

             /  27th November 2015

            The only long view we need to know is radical Islam will not rest until we infidels are dead. If moderate Muslims want to object, they will be joining us.

            Reply
          • traveller

             /  27th November 2015

            I find the opposite. He used to have a claim to truth-teller, but he has become a prisoner of his own agendaised beliefs.

            Reply
        • Maureen W

           /  27th November 2015

          Of the books I’ve read by John Pilger they have stood the test of time in their accuracy. Sometimes I find his manner in documentaries a bit condescending, but he is usually right on the money.

          Reply
    • Problem is, your “finish it fast” won’t finish it. We’ve tried all that already, haven’t we?
      But wait, I get it, there’s two of you! (secret salute here)
      I shall pre-empt the obvious extension to this line of thought, “Nuke the lot of them!”
      Another way of saying that is, “Bring out your extreme right-wingers! Bring out your vampires! Come out into the sun, you lot. This? No, it’s not a stake! It’s just a harmless sharpened length of wood”
      Love it, wish I was part of it … I lend you my mallet.
      Ah, sh*t, too much ‘lid’ …

      Reply
      • John Schmidt

         /  27th November 2015

        I think the point of the original post was to stop pussy footing around. The west try to do war nicely against a foe who does not have the same view. After years of doing war nicely in Sri Lanka the government had finally had enough and wiped out the Tamil Tigers with a decisive and quick action that was over in weeks after years of half arsed conflict. I think that was the intent of the original post. Whether the same could be done in the middle east I am not so sure because unlike Sri Lanka the problem has many many heads.

        Reply
        • And mark my words, the Tamil peoples’ sons and daughters shall rise up again, greater zealots than before directly due to defeat, as per Pol-Pot’s Cambodians, radical Palestinians and dozens and hundreds more ‘peoples’, except they are now IN NEGOTIATIONS for a federal solution (according to Wiki), and, I predict, if those negotiations fail. I’ve only skim-looked at Wiki, but Sri Lanka-Tamil looks like a complex issue to me.

          Reply
  3. There is no good solution, hindsight suggests we should have backed the FSA to the hilt when they had Damascus airport surrounded………………

    Corbyn is right and wrong, his questions of the PM are bang on, bombing will change little in the UK, except maybe harden the resolve of ISIS to conduct asymmetric warfare (terrorist attacks). At the same time on the front lines against ISIS, bombing forces the troops to disperse more, making the smaller dispersed groups more vulnerable to attack from the Kurds, Al Qaeda affiliates, Western Special Forces, Free Syrian Army forces and Assads Shiite Allies.

    Reply
    • Cogent, in a “deal with the hard reality” sense. Who knows what atrocities FSA might have committed if they’d won though? Evidence various “Arab Spring” nations.
      I could never see all those groups working together? Even if they did, once they’d defeated ISIS they’d just turn on each other, a la Russia & America just days after their ‘Allied’ defeat of Nazi Germany. There’s nothing force breeds but more force.

      Reply
      • The original FSA were soldiers of a secular state who had distaste for going Full auto on a crowd of civilians, hardly the cause celebre of extremists, but yes post overthrow there would have been chaos and a vacuum, though nothing as extreme as ISIS I suspect. The years of civil war have fomented extremism in people who started out pretty balanced.

        The Kurds are a shining light in all of this, I wish Turkey would just cede a portion of land to them for an independent state to get the ball rolling, but the Turks would rather commit Genocide than accept their Kurdish problem.

        Reply
        • I’ve wondered for decades what’s the problem with giving Kurds independent statehood? One might argue the same for Palestine and the Tamils too, to name but two of many?

          Reply
          • The problem is Turkey being in NATO……

            Reply
          • Because the descendants of multiple nationalities that call themselves Palestinians don’t want a two state solution. They want the destruction of Israel, to have as a Palestinian state.

            It isn’t Israel that keeps saying “NO” to a two state solution.

            Reply
            • No time to research this in depth right now but, I believe, to be more accurate, a faction of Palestinians known as Hezbillah (?) seek the destruction of Israel. I understand there are moderates who are prepared to negotiate a two state solution. And, anecdotally, I believe Israel put every impediment possible in the way of any solution. Regardless, the Israel/Palestine situation is a perfect example of non-negotiation leading to inter-generational religious and state terrorism. I stand to be corrected.

            • Hezbollah are Lebanon. Hamas are Palestinians, along with seven other Palestinian terrorist organisations. I’m not sure whether you are familiar with the PLO and Hamas charters (which call for the destruction of Israel) but negotiating on a two state solution is not part of that charter, the total destruction of Jews and Israel is. Whereas you admittedly have “No time to research this in depth right now”, I have done numerous articles and researched extensively.

              Regardless, the Israel/Palestine situation is a perfect example of non-negotiation leading to inter-generational religious and state terrorism. I stand to be corrected.”

              In the Hamas Charter it does not allow for a peaceful solution. Palestinian factions can’t even agree with each other, let alone collectively with Israel.

              The so called Palestinian National Authority doesn’t even control all of the supposed Palestinian territory, as Hamas controls the Gaza Strip, and the Fatah led governing body is illegal since the term of Abbas ended 9 January 2009 with no elections held since.

              It’s not all as clear cut as you make it sound, and as long is Israel have settlements in West Bank and as long as Palestinians (and other Muslim groups for that matter) want to wipe Israel off the map, but the former is not the cause of the latter.

              Here is an interesting watch, and shows a widespread sentiment that isn’t often exposed or spoken about unless it is forced. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPjpqiCxc4o

            • Travdog, good, thank you. I am somewhat corrected and not at all chastened. Regrettably I can’t watch the youtube link because I do internet on a vodem stick. (The cyber equivalent of pigeon post) The data is chronically expensive and how Vodafone get away with it in a so-called ‘free market’ is quite beyond me. In areas like telecommunications I’m as free economy as Rothbard himself. Indeed, I also make the argument telecoms should be a ‘tertiary’ human right in a prosperous society. (Must try and keep to that rule of no ‘lid’ before lunch!)
              I’ll look next time I’m at a Wifi hotspot.
              Cheers.
              ψ – from the Precariat.

  4. Your NZ readers might be interested in my post on Corbyn and Syria at TS. Here’s my wordpress link so those of you who don’t like clicking on the Standard can have a read:

    https://wordpress.com/post/tereoputake.wordpress.com/132

    (Hope that’s OK, PG, not sure what you think about links to other blogs)

    In a nutshell, if Corbyn sticks to his principles, he’s a dead man walking.

    Reply
    • Damn! Can’t access it. Do you mean “dead man walking” in political terms? Gone from the leadership? If so, and he sticks to his principles, my respect for him shall multiply vastly, inversely with my repulsion for the mob, the herd-instinct (which is the ‘thing’ bolstering support for the Western Imperialist Wars).
      If you mean “dead” in the blairmullholland sense below, please join the long procession of scaremongers.
      Incidentally, rationally and logically (and even intuitively) this does NOT mean I do not want security here in NZ. Indeed, I’d argue I want security for everyone in the world.

      Reply
    • So why does that link not work? Is it not what it seems?

      Reply
    • This however does work

      https://tereoputake.wordpress.com/ ….. first post on the host url

      Reply
    • Tereoputake, what’s with the Hammer & Sicle (sic)?
      General interest question only.

      Reply
    • Whoops, sorry folks! Correct link here: https://tereoputake.wordpress.com/2015/11/26/corbyns-isis-crisis/

      Partizan: If Corbyn forces a vote in his caucus he will lose. The majority support intervention. It wouldn’t immediately be a fatal blow, but it would severely undermine his authority. I reckon he’ll opt to avoid that happening by supporting a conscience vote.

      And the hammer and sickle is a reference to my Commie youth. I still use Marxist analysis where I can (particularly the ‘follow the money’ theory to see who benefits from any given situation). Nowadays I think I would qualify as a small ‘s’ socialist. The loony left think I’m a reactionary!

      Reply
      • And how do the loony right view you?
        You sound like a damned sensible human being to me.
        ‘Follow the money” is an excellent analytic tool.

        Reply
        • Cheers, Partizan Z! My handle translates as ‘the voice of reason’, but to be fair that’s pretty tongue in cheek. I’d love to think that the loony right consider me revolutionary scum, but actually, I doubt they regularly read my stuff.

          Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  27th November 2015

        Good article, TRP. The bombing is necessary to aid those on the ground, eg the Kurds, to destroy ISIS source of oil sales funding and to destroy their urban bases. Corbyn is simply a fantasist whose days in power are inevitably limited to his first collisions with reality. You are an intelligent and considered Lefty. No wonder the Loony Left hate you. They have serious issues with facts and reality.

        Reply
        • jaspa

           /  27th November 2015

          Some of the comments under TRP’s post on The Standard certainly back up your last statement.

          Reply
      • That’s an interesting piece, TRP, but I suspect the call for a conscience vote in the Commons on the issue is a no-goer. You just can’t have a conscience vote on a foreign policy issue in Parliament. Voters need to know where their parties stand on foreign policy, the economy, and core domestic issues. To allow a conscience vote on this might sound pragmatic, but it’s an open acceptance that Corbyn has no discipline over his caucus.

        The pragmatic solution is for Corbyn to have a caucus vote on the issue, and agree to be bound by his caucus, just as the caucus minority should agree to be bound by the caucus majority. Caucus is the forum for thrashing out caucus dissent. If the consequence of that is that Corbyn is in the minority and has to do a back-down or a u-turn, then that is the reality of leading a caucus. If he can’t persuade his caucus while in opposition, then he can’t hope to do so while in Government.

        Reply
  5. I can’t imagine what sort of negotiations Corbyn would want. Would he strike a deal to be beheaded last?!

    Reply
    • He, Assange, Snowden, Pilger and Dotcom would be shivering in their boots when they realised that a lunatic reciting the Koran, a sharp knife and a videographer cares not a jot about their sorry apologist rrrrrrrrses

      Reply
  6. Kevin

     /  27th November 2015

    Bomb the bastards back to the stone age.

    Oh that’s right. They’re already in the stone age. Stone age barbarians with Cold War weapons.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s