U.S, UK and France Launch Missile Strikes in Syria

[noel43]

Originally Posted by Mick

Her Majesty's government has royal prerogative powers, the government is the executive and can issue commands to the military without Parliamentary approval.

When then Prime Minister, David Cameron's vote in 2013 to strike Syria was defeated, he honoured that vote but he didn't have to do so, legally. He could have had the vote, lost as he did and still took military action.

Seeking parliamentary approval has become the standard convention, but they are not necessarily legally enforceable.

This is why you have the apparent Putin appeaser, Corbyn, trying to suggest creating a War Power Act, that requires a vote in the house, to pass any legal test in the future that requires Parliament to approve military action. I think such an Act would bog us down in litigation, while meanwhile we are having bombs thrown over our heads.

But as for May ordering a strike with our allies this weekend, she is legally protected in the sense that a Parliamentary approval may be circumvented to protect either, i)Critical national interests, ii)Prevent humanitarian catastrophe, or iii) In self-defence.

I would say a foreign regime, such as Syria using Chemical weapons comes under "prevent humanitarian catastrophe', which Theresa May will have to justify tomorrow when she speaks in the Commons and likely use this line of passing the legal test for the military strike.

Looks like Trump'S BITCH got away with it.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

We are talking about Jeremy Corbyn here, Hugh.

---------- Post added at 18:44 ---------- Previous post was at 18:42 ----------


What, who think JC should be PM? Sorry, but there's no excuse....

It does not matter who we are talking about as it could be Alien Zarg from outer space as the trouble with you its all about your viewpoint and nobody else's and if any posters thing differently to your view you insult and patronise them and make it quite clear that you think they are simple-minded
and unintelligent..

Originally Posted by noel43

Looks like Trump'S BITCH got away with it.

Do not use 'derogatory' language like that again on this forum.

And you're wrong, as per usual.

There was nothing to get away with. She passed the legal test to use military action.

[noel43]

Originally Posted by Mick

Do not use 'derogatory' language like that again on this forum.

And you're wrong, as per usual.

There was nothing to get away with. She passed the legal test to use military action.

So says the pacifist who wouldn't defend his country.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

It does not matter who we are talking about as it could be Alien Zarg from outer space as the trouble with you its all about your viewpoint and nobody else's and if any posters thing differently to your view you insult and patronise them and make it quite clear that you think they are simple-minded
and unintelligent..

I have only said this of Jeremy Corbyn, because he is dangerous. He consorts with terrorists and if in power he would seriously damage our security and ruin our economy.

Plenty on this forum have questioned the judgement of the American people in choosing Donald Trump as their president and I didn't hear you protesting then about their right to say so. But where Oh, Jeremy Corbyn is concerned, there seems to be a bit of a blind spot.

At least the Donald isn't devastating the American economy, which makes him rather better than JC.

Originally Posted by noel43

So says the pacifist who wouldn't defend his country.

So says nothing.

I don't need to defend this country, we're not at war.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I have only said this of Jeremy Corbyn, because he is dangerous. He consorts with terrorists and if in power he would seriously damage our security and ruin our economy.

Plenty on this forum have questioned the judgement of the American people in choosing Donald Trump as their president and I didn't hear you protesting then about their right to say so. But where Oh, Jeremy Corbyn is concerned, there seems to be a bit of a blind spot.

At least the Donald isn't devastating the American economy, which makes him rather better than JC.

The point I see Denphone making isn't about who is the better out of Trump or Corbyn. It's about accepting that others have valid but different viewpoints and respecting their right to hold those views.

Originally Posted by noel43

So says the pacifist who wouldn't defend his country.

You understand we live in a country with a civilian-led military right?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The point I see Denphone making isn't about who is the better out of Trump or Corbyn. It's about accepting that others have valid but different viewpoints and respecting their right to hold those views.

Yes, I understand that, but I think we must say on these forums when we feel that people are wrong about the politicians they support.

Den himself said when Nigel Farage was chosen to stand as MP for UKIP: Who's the more foolish...the fool or the fool's who follows him?" (sic).

And he had every right to say that.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Plenty on this forum have questioned the judgement of the American people in choosing Donald Trump as their president and I didn't hear you protesting then about their right to say so. But where Oh, Jeremy Corbyn is concerned, there seems to be a bit of a blind spot.

No blind spot here as l have consistently voiced my concerns about Jeremy Corbyn but l have just as many concerns about Theresa May as l see neither as competent leaders at all as Mrs T even though l was not a great fan of hers was far far superior to the current incumbent of 10 Downing Street.

---------- Post added at 04:49 ---------- Previous post was at 04:43 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

At least the Donald isn't devastating the American economy, which makes him rather better than JC.

Granted He might not be devastating the American economy but personally l don't like his preening narcissistic ways but everybody has a different viewpoint and l respect that.

---------- Post added at 04:52 ---------- Previous post was at 04:49 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, I understand that, but I think we must say on these forums when we feel that people are wrong about the politicians they support.

Say what you want but don't insult and patronise those forum members who have a different viewpoint to yours because they have just as many legitimate reasons for their viewpoint as you have for yours.

---------- Post added at 04:58 ---------- Previous post was at 04:52 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Den himself said when Nigel Farage was chosen to stand as MP for UKIP: Who's the more foolish...the fool or the fool's who follows him?" (sic).

And he had every right to say that.

Would you support a party based on just one policy? as good luck to those who voted for Nigel Farage but one policy was never going to make them electable in a million years.

[TheDaddy]

For the same 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8307726.html

Interesting, wonder if it's credible. What I don't find credible is 100+ missiles launched and no one died, it's either a modern miricle or there was collusion and if there was advanced warning who does that benefit?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

No blind spot here as l have consistently voiced my concerns about Jeremy Corbyn but l have just as many concerns about Theresa May as l see neither as competent leaders at all as Mrs T even though l was not a great fan of hers was far far superior to the current incumbent of 10 Downing Street.

Granted He might not be devastating the American economy but personally l don't like his preening narcissistic ways but everybody has a different viewpoint and l respect that.

Say what you want but don't insult and patronise those forum members who have a different viewpoint to yours because they have just as many legitimate reasons for their viewpoint as you have for yours.

Would you support a party based on just one policy? as good luck to those who voted for Nigel Farage but one policy was never going to make them electable in a million years.

That's very interesting, Den. You have just as many concerns about Theresa May as Jeremy Corbyn? Wow. Since when did Theresa give any cause for concern that was comparable with JC as an apologist for terrorists? How does she compare with the Leader of the Opposition, who cannot even put together a decent Shadow Cabinet because he doesn't even have the trust of the PLP? What even comes near the concerns expressed widely that JC holds up Venezuala as a model he admires? You still voted for this man despite these concerns?

I don't think I have insulted anybody by suggesting they are sleepwalking into supporting a man who is set on devastating this country. And despite criticising me for saying that, you then proceed to justify calling people who supported Nigel Farage 'fools'. In that last paragraph, you destroyed your own argument.

I think you got out of the wrong side of the bed yesterday, Den!

---------- Post added at 09:43 ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 ----------

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

We can be targeted they can be targeted everyone can be targeted and that's always been the case so it changes nothing. If the UK becomes too scared to act because of repercussions then we really are a small nation and would be better off out of anything risky we should get out of NATO as that's risky good job we are getting out of the EU that was one big risk and the UK is now out of the risk business. Appeasement always sounds good in the short term trouble is in the medium to longterm it costs more lives, money and time assad and putin being left alone to do whatever they want isn't good for anyone.

Well said, RizzyKing. Appeasement of aggressors is never a good idea.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

That's very interesting, Den. You have just as many concerns about Theresa May as Jeremy Corbyn? Wow.

Voters have many concerns about a whole plethora of issues so there is nothing wow about that unless you think we should all think like you.

---------- Post added at 10:39 ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

.

I think you got out of the wrong side of the bed yesterday, Den!

No l am fine and dandy OB even though l woke up several times last night..

Lets be honest if it was a straight choice between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn i think it's irrational to pick a leader who cosys up to people who attack the citizens of this country, has admiration for hamas and hezbollah and thinks Venezuela is a practical model for a developed nation. Sorry Den but Corbyns popularity was based on out and out lies and half truths and with the exception of momentum most are seeing him for what he is.

Also lets not pretend that Jeremy Corbyn is the labour party or even representative of what it has stood for in recent years even the majority of the plp are struggling to stomach him or what he stands for but they believe in the ideals of the labour party and are reluctant to leave it with him at the helm.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

Voters have many concerns about a whole plethora of issues so there is nothing wow about that unless you think we should all think like you.

---------- Post added at 10:39 ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 ----------



No l am fine and dandy OB even though l woke up several times last night..

I am not expecting everyone to think like me, Den. I'm asking that people take a good hard look at Jeremy Corbyn and what he stands for before voting for him next time around.