Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

Who will you vote for?

  • Conservatives

  • Labour

  • Lib Dem

  • UKIP

  • Other (please state)

  • I won't be voting

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Polling has closed up between Tories and Labour. 8% gap according to Kantar, 5% for Yougov.

Momentum with Labour, but hard to trust polls and worth bearing in mind much of the recent shift will be predicated on the fallout from the dementia tax and, perhaps more damagingly, May's about-turn (rather bursts the 'strong and stable' bubble, that one) - probably a somewhat temporary effect.
 
cheesyboy said:
Does anyone actually dispute that middle eastern intervention has sparked terrorism?
Click to expand...
Asked these questions on that subject in the Manchester thread:

1) If intervention causes terror, why did the interventions in the former Yugoslavia, Serbia and Sierra Leone not result in terror attacks by the people we intervened against?
2) Why have France, Germany, Mali, Central African Republic, Nigeria and the Philippines, who did not take part in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, been targets of Islamic terrorism?
3) Why has Poland, who did take part in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, not been affected by Islamic terrorism?
 
cheesyboy said:
You don't think the recent upsurge has anything to do with middle east disruption then?
Click to expand...
Of course but I think there would have been disruption without us getting involved. Arab springs would have happened without us so we would have still seen issues, maybe just wouldn't have 'ISIS' as they are today
 
scorza said:
Asked these questions on that subject in the Manchester thread:

1) If intervention causes terror, why did the interventions in the former Yugoslavia, Serbia and Sierra Leone not result in terror attacks by the people we intervened against?
2) Why have France, Germany, Mali, Central African Republic, Nigeria and the Philippines, who did not take part in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, been targets of Islamic terrorism?
3) Why has Poland, who did take part in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, not been affected by Islamic terrorism?
Click to expand...
1. Because nation-building was performed/less necessary anyway since governmental and security systems were put in place (former Yugo - i don't know enough about Sierra Leone)
2. Because the intervention caused the vacuum into which these terror groups have emerged, rather than the intervention being an aggravation in and of itself
3. Chance? Not a very sexy target? I don't know. But also, see answer 2.
 
Greebo said:
Yes, a lot of people on here do. Absolutely no correlation and in their belief all Muslims should be interned along with children. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Has anyone ever actually said that though?

I think we should round up and ship off everyone on the terrorist 'watch list' and anyone that supports or knows of their beliefs and doesn't report it. That is hardly the same as targetting every muslim
 
XeNoN89 said:
Has anyone ever actually said that though?

I think we should round up and ship off everyone on the terrorist 'watch list' and anyone that supports or knows of their beliefs and doesn't report it. That is hardly the same as targetting every muslim
Click to expand...

Yes people have said all.

But on the watch list, bearing in mind both of the last two terrorists have been reported, looked at and deemed to low risk to warrant putting on the watch list, rounding up the 3000 on the watch list would have stopped neither attack.
 
cheesyboy said:
Does anyone actually dispute that middle eastern intervention has sparked terrorism?
Click to expand...

Had this discussion with a work colleague. He believes that had "the west" used 9/11 as an opportunity to attempt peaceful discussion with resolution rather than bombing campaigns, we wouldn't have any of the terrorism issues we have now.

Whereas I agree intervention hasn't helped, I don't believe it can be completely blamed for the terrorist attacks.
 
Do terrorists want us to focus our resources on police and security within the UK?

I am not a big Corbyn fan but i cant help but people give him stick for the wrong reasons. The story is literately about how controversial Corbyn has been, yet none of the quotes seem all that hard to disagree with. Lets see what he has said:

In a speech, Mr Corbyn will say the "war on terror is simply not working".
Click to expand...

Cant argue with that

He will say that "many experts, including professionals in our intelligence and security services have pointed to the connections between wars our government has supported or fought in other countries and terrorism here at home".

"That assessment in no way reduces the guilt of those who attack our children. Those terrorists will forever be reviled and held to account for their actions.

"But an informed understanding of the causes of terrorism is an essential part of an effective response that will protect the security of our people that fights rather than fuels terrorism."
Click to expand...

So he wants to understand the cause of terrorism to stop it and realises that foreign policy can contribute to extremism. He also condemns those terrorists.

"We need a smarter way to reduce the threat from countries that nurture terrorists and generate terrorism."

He will add: "No government can prevent every terrorist attack. If an individual is determined enough and callous enough, sometimes they will get through.

"But the responsibility of government is to minimise that chance - to ensure the police have the resources they need, that our foreign policy reduces rather than increases the threat to this country, and that at home we never surrender the freedoms we have won and that terrorists are so determined to take away."
Click to expand...

Some more level headed good points. No government can protect from everything but it is their job to minimise risk. We should most definitely look at smarter ways to lower the threat.
 
Last edited:
cheesyboy said:
1. Because nation-building was performed/less necessary anyway since governmental and security systems were put in place (former Yugo - i don't know enough about Sierra Leone)
2. Because the intervention caused the vacuum into which these terror groups have emerged, rather than the intervention being an aggravation in and of itself
3. Chance? Not a very sexy target? I don't know. But also, see answer 2.
Click to expand...

Certain middle eastern countries also have to take responsibility. Without the funding and support from the sectarian sunni-shia power struggle they (isis and co) wouldn't have anything like the capability they do now. And that isn't down to us, infact we have had a positive effect on raining in SA.

I think even if the interventions didn't happen we would still be seeing terrorism. seeing as the very way of life of the west is seen as such a threat. Undoubtubly though, our destabilising actions in iraq etc haven't helped the situation.
 
Dolph said:
Is corbyn really advocating the best way to deal with terrorists is to change our behaviour to do what they want, rather than what we think is right?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40053427
Click to expand...

Well if he is right, doing what we think is right for the last few decades hasnt got us anywhere has it?

And if its all about doing what is right why do we never get involved military action in other countries round the world where genocide is taking place and equally refuse to seel Saudi Arabia the weapons they are using to kill cilivans in Yemen?

I am all for having a moral compass and doing the "right" thing but we all know that is not why we do these things.
 
cheesyboy said:
Polling has closed up between Tories and Labour. 8% gap according to Kantar, 5% for Yougov.

Momentum with Labour, but hard to trust polls and worth bearing in mind much of the recent shift will be predicated on the fallout from the dementia tax and, perhaps more damagingly, May's about-turn (rather bursts the 'strong and stable' bubble, that one) - probably a somewhat temporary effect.
Click to expand...
I was hopeful before Manchester that Labour would close the gap significantly, and at least cut her majority. After Manchester though, all bets are off, because people are idiots.
 
Uther said:
I was hopeful before Manchester that Labour would close the gap significantly, and at least cut her majority. After Manchester though, all bets are off, because people are idiots.
Click to expand...

or perhaps don't want to back a leader who has openly supported terrorists and consistently voted against anti-terror legislation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom