what will it take to make him join the aussies and americans in zapping isis. but we sholdnt allow western forces boots on the ground , only use airpower... he does seem a bit feeble
"This is not about British combat troops on the ground. It is about working with others to extinguish this terrorist threat.
As this strategy intensifies, we are ready to take whatever steps are necessary to deal with this threat and keep our country safe".
From the above quote you can see he hasn't ruled out the eventual use of ground troops at all.
I still think it would make more sense for a predominantly Muslim country to take the lead roll, maybe with a little help from a few other nations. Both Saudi and Turkey have modern and powerful militaries, I would rather seem them send ground troops.
Perhaps there should, but it would be a bit foolish for Cameron to threaten IS with military strikes until it has taken place. Even then, telling the public about airstrikes and the SAS going in would be a bit silly. I'm not sure the SAS like their whereabouts being publicised!
Which is what the OP doesn't seem to understand.
The SAS went into Iraq in August and have remained there.
"This is not about British combat troops on the ground. It is about working with others to extinguish this terrorist threat.
As this strategy intensifies, we are ready to take whatever steps are necessary to deal with this threat and keep our country safe".
From the above quote you can see he hasn't ruled out the eventual use of ground troops at all.
i dont support the use of western ground troops..its not wise as the local people should be the ones to defend their areas at ground level. but the west can use drones and air power to help them.. meanwhile isis is not going away
Was what he said enough to keep the public happy that he is doing everything the country could do to stop them?
Id like to see the SAS go in and locate the hostages and free them, Id even support boots on the ground to defeat this evil group.
But what Cameron delivered was far short of anything close to that, in fact he didnt even say our fighter jets would even attack them!
After what the UK government did in Iraq I think we have a duty to send the troops there to save the people from the evil that is ISIS.
We cannot just walk on by if we are to keep this country safe. We have to confront this menace. Step by step, we must drive back, dismantle and ultimately destroy ISIL and what it stands for.
We will do so in a calm, deliberate way, but with an iron determination. We will not do so on our own, but with working with our allies, not just in the United States and in Europe, but also in the region. Because this organisation poses a massive threat to the entire Middle East. So we will defeat ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy.
First, we will work with the Iraqi government to ensure it represents all of its people and is able to tackle this threat effectively.
We will support the Kurdish regional government who are holding the front line against ISIL. We will help them protect their own people and the minorities - including Christians that they have helped already - through our supplies of ammunition and of training.
Second, we will work at the United Nations to mobilise the broadest possible support to bear down on ISIL.
Third, the United States is taking direct military action. We support that. British Tornadoes and surveillance aircraft have been helping with intelligence gathering and logistics.
This is not about British combat troops on the ground. It is about working with others to extinguish this terrorist threat.
As this strategy intensifies, we are ready to take whatever steps are necessary to deal with this threat and keep our country safe.
The SAS have been in Iraq since August. The US also tried and failed to rescue hostages.
The BIBS. What do they mean to you? That Britain sits back and twiddles it's thumbs. It says to me we will do what is necessary. Neither the US or Britain are intent on "boots on the ground", yet. Iraq has it's own army as to the Kurds who are being supported.
In fairness I dont know, Im not privy to the actions we could take and what intelligence we have.
But as it is with this speech It seems to be a speech that he would have been better not making, his words don't show enough anger to me, it certainly wouldn't scare me if I were someone in ISIS,
What Prime Minister with half a brain is going to condemn himself for all eternity as a warmongering villain by rushing into battle the way Tony Blair did?
What Prime Minister with half a brain is going to condemn himself for all eternity as a warmongering villain by rushing into battle the way Tony Blair did?
Good point. I also doubt if Obama is anything like the idiot Bush.
What Prime Minister with half a brain is going to condemn himself for all eternity as a warmongering villain by rushing into battle the way Tony Blair did?
And there is a big differance between fighting a army, and fighting terrorists, most armys know when they are beat and will surrender. Boots on the ground could be very bloody, and cost alot of uk lives. These nutters are willing to die for what they believe, but there mean aim would be to take as many uk soliders with them as they could. Terrorists that become suicide bombers are the most dangerous thing there is, every man, women, child could be a human bomb.
What Prime Minister with half a brain is going to condemn himself for all eternity as a warmongering villain by rushing into battle the way Tony Blair did?
Yes, but I think feelings about the Iraq war might have been different if Saddam or his sons had been shown beheading innocent British citizens, live on video.
We don't need a "dodgy dossier" or missing WMD's, the evidence is there for all to see.
Good point. I also doubt if Obama is anything like the idiot Bush.
well his threats/obsession about Russia and stopping putin are certainly similar to bush. just because he's not a republican doesn't mean he's any less a jack ass.
David Cameron has just delivered a speech in his response to the latest killing by ISIS
Personally I think the speech is spineless and is more words than action, I doubt anyone in ISIS will lose any sleep or change their current course of action over Cameron's words.
David Cameron is nothing but a spineless wonder.
Couldn't win an election. A total failure as a PM. Failed at cutting immigration.
Tax cuts for the rich. Living standards down for the rest.
Cameron is a real-life Will from 'The Inbetweeners'. Like Cameron, he thinks talking all big in a plummy accent will hide the fact that he is clueless and out of his depth.
I read a comprehensive condemnation of ISIS and a commitment to doing what it takes to stop them. I am not sure why the OP seems to think this was a 'spineless' speech. Had Cameron said 'we'll pay them off next time' or 'this is Iraq & Syria's problem' or 'this will be peace for our time' then I would say it was spineless - but he didn't say those things.
Couldn't win an election. A total failure as a PM. Failed at cutting immigration.
Tax cuts for the rich. Living standards down for the rest.
Cameron is a real-life Will from 'The Inbetweeners'. Like Cameron, he thinks talking all big in a plummy accent will hide the fact that he is clueless and out of his depth.
I cannot wait to see Cameron kicked out of office
Goodness me, what a load of rubbish. I suppose you would be happy with Milliband as PM, I certainly wouldn't. I think actually he has done a pretty good job given the state of the recession and the country when he took over.
If he shows anger, then the people doing this know it is working and it will encourage more. He gave a measured response and I'm sure there is a lot going on the background to find the group.
And there is a big differance between fighting a army, and fighting terrorists, most armys know when they are beat and will surrender. Boots on the ground could be very bloody, and cost alot of uk lives. These nutters are willing to die for what they believe, but there mean aim would be to take as many uk soliders with them as they could. Terrorists that become suicide bombers are the most dangerous thing there is, every man, women, child could be a human bomb.
But they are an army, they just use terrorist tactics when it suits them. You don't get a rag-bag group of terrorists advancing through a country in tanks and armoured vehicles capturing towns and cities.
I agree, boots on the ground should be a last resort for the USA or ourselves. But I do think we should send a message that is both swift and brutal. I didn't expect Cameron to say much, actions speak louder than words. I also don't know the logistics of the situation, we will need a base to launch air attacks and our new carriers won't be fully operational for years. But a sustained bombing operation should sufficiently deplete the IS forces so that our allies (whoever they may be) can clean up the rest.
I don't think for one moment he is going to tell us what is going on in the background. Do people expect him to give us all the details. I would hate to be in his shoes and I think he did a very good speech and echoed what the majority of us feel. Like him or loathe him, I felt he said what the majority of decent people in this country feel. He wants to make sure that he has the backing of everyone before he commits to any action. He had his fingers burnt last year when the Lib Dems and Labour didn't back him.
I don't think for one moment he is going to tell us what is going on in the background. Do people expect him to give us all the details. I would hate to be in his shoes and I think he did a very good speech and echoed what the majority of us feel. Like him or loathe him, I felt he said what the majority of decent people in this country feel. He wants to make sure that he has the backing of everyone before he commits to any action. He had his fingers burnt last year when the Lib Dems and Labour didn't back him.
That was probably just as well though, wasn't it ? We would have found ourselves helping pave the way for these evil extremists. Sometimes it's better the devil you know (Assad) than the alternative.
well his threats/obsession about Russia and stopping putin are certainly similar to bush. just because he's not a republican doesn't mean he's any less a jack ass.
Couldn't win an election. A total failure as a PM. Failed at cutting immigration.
Tax cuts for the rich. Living standards down for the rest.
Cameron is a real-life Will from 'The Inbetweeners'. Like Cameron, he thinks talking all big in a plummy accent will hide the fact that he is clueless and out of his depth.
I cannot wait to see Cameron kicked out of office
I didnt realise this was a party political broadcast. Good luck to you if you think labour will do any better. Now lets get back to the main discussion point.
What Prime Minister with half a brain is going to condemn himself for all eternity as a warmongering villain by rushing into battle the way Tony Blair did?
...or, before we're really out of Afghanistan, commit our troops to ANOTHER such war in under a year to the next election...;-)
If he's re-elected, THEN you'll see some action (sic)...
Comments
"This is not about British combat troops on the ground. It is about working with others to extinguish this terrorist threat.
As this strategy intensifies, we are ready to take whatever steps are necessary to deal with this threat and keep our country safe".
From the above quote you can see he hasn't ruled out the eventual use of ground troops at all.
I don't support hot headed knee jerk reactions.
The SAS went into Iraq in August and have remained there.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11032684/SAS-sent-in-to-Iraq-as-US-troops-land-on-Mount-Sinjar.html
The US tried and failed to rescue hostages
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/21/iraq-security-usa-hostages-idUSL2N0QQ33C20140821
I see nothing wrong with Cameron's speech.
i dont support the use of western ground troops..its not wise as the local people should be the ones to defend their areas at ground level. but the west can use drones and air power to help them.. meanwhile isis is not going away
The SAS have been in Iraq since August. The US also tried and failed to rescue hostages.
The BIBS. What do they mean to you? That Britain sits back and twiddles it's thumbs. It says to me we will do what is necessary. Neither the US or Britain are intent on "boots on the ground", yet. Iraq has it's own army as to the Kurds who are being supported.
What Prime Minister with half a brain is going to condemn himself for all eternity as a warmongering villain by rushing into battle the way Tony Blair did?
Good point. I also doubt if Obama is anything like the idiot Bush.
And there is a big differance between fighting a army, and fighting terrorists, most armys know when they are beat and will surrender. Boots on the ground could be very bloody, and cost alot of uk lives. These nutters are willing to die for what they believe, but there mean aim would be to take as many uk soliders with them as they could. Terrorists that become suicide bombers are the most dangerous thing there is, every man, women, child could be a human bomb.
Yes, but I think feelings about the Iraq war might have been different if Saddam or his sons had been shown beheading innocent British citizens, live on video.
We don't need a "dodgy dossier" or missing WMD's, the evidence is there for all to see.
well his threats/obsession about Russia and stopping putin are certainly similar to bush. just because he's not a republican doesn't mean he's any less a jack ass.
David Cameron is nothing but a spineless wonder.
Couldn't win an election. A total failure as a PM. Failed at cutting immigration.
Tax cuts for the rich. Living standards down for the rest.
Cameron is a real-life Will from 'The Inbetweeners'. Like Cameron, he thinks talking all big in a plummy accent will hide the fact that he is clueless and out of his depth.
I cannot wait to see Cameron kicked out of office
Goodness me, what a load of rubbish. I suppose you would be happy with Milliband as PM, I certainly wouldn't. I think actually he has done a pretty good job given the state of the recession and the country when he took over.
If he shows anger, then the people doing this know it is working and it will encourage more. He gave a measured response and I'm sure there is a lot going on the background to find the group.
What good will that achieve?
But they are an army, they just use terrorist tactics when it suits them. You don't get a rag-bag group of terrorists advancing through a country in tanks and armoured vehicles capturing towns and cities.
I agree, boots on the ground should be a last resort for the USA or ourselves. But I do think we should send a message that is both swift and brutal. I didn't expect Cameron to say much, actions speak louder than words. I also don't know the logistics of the situation, we will need a base to launch air attacks and our new carriers won't be fully operational for years. But a sustained bombing operation should sufficiently deplete the IS forces so that our allies (whoever they may be) can clean up the rest.
That was probably just as well though, wasn't it ? We would have found ourselves helping pave the way for these evil extremists. Sometimes it's better the devil you know (Assad) than the alternative.
I was referring to the Middle East.
I didnt realise this was a party political broadcast. Good luck to you if you think labour will do any better. Now lets get back to the main discussion point.
I agree that Obama isn't like Bush. I never liked Bush at all.
what difference does that make? Obamas comments on Russia are similar to bush on iraq
...or, before we're really out of Afghanistan, commit our troops to ANOTHER such war in under a year to the next election...;-)
If he's re-elected, THEN you'll see some action (sic)...