imagine if jeremy corbyn ever got in power??

blair in jail

Because the alternative has kept us all safe hasn't it?

roger..........he said it was wrong to kill jihadi john....do you??

No - but I'd prefer it if he'd been put up against good old imperialist western justice on a war crimes trial at the Hague, where we could have made him account for his actions, or failing that, make him look like the pathetic inadequate he was in front of all those teenage boys seduced by '80 virgins in the afterlife' (or 'w@nkers' as Boris Johnson correctly identified them as).

Question for you

Do you think that's the last 'Jihadi John' we'll hear about? We've killed the original but my bet is there's another unhinged patsy waiting in Northern Syria, willing to trade glorious death at the hands of the infidel for a few years as Kuffir's favourite bogeyman and worldwide notoriety.

Roger, I doubt you'd have to go as far as Northern Syria to find the next Jihadi John. Much closer to home would be my guess.

You make a fair point but literally, I bet they've got another dozen murderous imbeciles lined up out there already - I mean, look at the column inches they've garnered out of the original?

2k road deaths a year

Id ask Putin to kill them all using whatever weapons he felt were needed.

he said it was wrong to kill jihadi john



Utter bullsh1t. Here is what Corbyn said

"We await identification of the person targeted in last night’s US air attack in Syria. It appears Mohammed Emwazi has been held to account for his callous and brutal crimes. However, it would have been far better for us all if he had been held to account in a court of law.

“These events only underline the necessity of accelerating international efforts, under the auspices of the UN, to bring an end to the Syrian conflict as part of a comprehensive regional settlement."

I listened to 'what the papers say' this morning.
It covered last weeks news from a selection of papers.

I believe it was the telegraph that actually measured the angle of corbyn's head bow in relation to remembrance sunday.
It was said to be around 10 degrees and therefore totally unacceptable.
I had trouble holding back the laughing its so fookin pathetic.

Naïve to think that he could have gone on trial.
Why risk lives trying to arrest him anyway and if he hads been caught the court would have been a target as well.
Better all round that he was killed.

Corbyn is a laughing stock. Long may he remain.

I would like to think that the Prime Minister in charge of running the country would be more intelligent than myself

Corbyn fails hugely in this respect

As stated above, a laughing stock

bigH, as you don't demonstrate much evidence of a proper schooling I would imagine being more intelligent than you (or "than yourself" as you would say) is setting the bar extremely low.

Loads of Jeremy Corbyn types have held positions of power over many years. That's why we are all living in absolute utopia.

The reason that JC shouldn't get into power is that he'd (further) feck up the economy. I don't think IS an be used as an argument for the continuation of the status quo, since you could well say that they got us into this mess in the first place.

He won't ... he reminds me of a well dressed Michael Foot, sorry better dressed.

Unelectable.

IF THE government applied their trade union laws to leaders ballots he,d probably be the only leader in the country

The bombing of Iraq and subsequently Syria is part of the reason why the likes of these terrorist organisations now exist - perhaps those who propose further bombing raids and direct action in relation to destroying IS will put their hands up to participate as some of the boots on the ground

The fact is IS will ultimately only be destroyed by action from within that part of the world and as such we need to negotiate with the different factions who are fighting them to try and garner their confidence and generate a means to eliminate the real enemy and to attempt to stabilise the Middle East

he's recently admitted he collects manhole covers and once shagged big Di Abbott.

He'd fit in here a treat.

Nov 16, 2015 -- 2:00PM, cardifffc wrote:

roger..........he said it was wrong to kill jihadi john....do you??

He didn't say that though did he.

Leaving aside his strange taste in hobbies and women I enjoy reading what Corbyn says. He is at least thinking about the issues and formulating a considered response and that contrasts greatly with the likes of Cameron. I see nothing wrong with his comments about this goon and the other one Bin Laden. We lecture the world about our moral superiority because we have the rule of law. Of course it would be better if it were possible to put these people on trial thus demystifying them and denying them the cloak of respectability by turning them into "martyrs".

What I would like him to clarify is if his ideal scenario isn't possible would he sanction smoking these motherfruckers?

He seems very evasive when asked such questions dismissing them as hypotheticals and those are the words of a scoundrel which is concerning.

i have voted labour most of my life but with this man in charge i will never vote labour

We should talk to these people , not shoot to kill says Corbyn. If they are waving an AK-47 around and shooting people in wheel chairs can we expect the policemen who open fire to be prosecuted like Sgt Blackman in Afghanistan and the policemen involved in the liam Duggan case ? What would you do in the armed response scenario ?

PC Plod to Jihadi John.

"Excuse me sir. Would you please accompany me to the station? We've got a few questions we'd like to ask you about some beheadings."

john92     16 Nov 15 15:07

best and most intelligent post on this thread imo

perhaps we should have asked IS to hand him over under International extradition law.

I'm sure they would have been more than happy to oblige.

Corbyn and his chums on here live in cloud cuckoo land. Should have got him on trial

Is there any proof yet Jihadi John is dead? Or did they just kill some randomer?

Mr Corbyn was asked by BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg whether he would be happy to order police or the military to shoot to kill if there was a similar attack on Britain's streets.
Mr Corbyn said: "I'm not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general - I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often can be counterproductive.

Totally out of his depth I'm afraid.

It appears Mohammed Emwazi has been held to account for his callous and brutal crimes. However, it would have been far better for us all if he had been held to account in a court of law.

He doesnt say we should have got him on trial he says it would have been better if had been held to account in a court of law. He also says he has been held to account for callous and brutal crimes.

I think there are occasions when it is the only option to kill - this being a good example although it does raise the issue of what happens if we hit the wrong target.

Can you imagine the dangers if Jihadi John was kept prisoner?
How many attacks would there be on the prison? Every warder would be targeted.
With these high profile cases shoot to kill is the sensible action.

Meanwhile, amongst all the willy-waving and empty bravado, the mother of a man who was actually murdered by the deranged idiot known as Jihadi John says:

‘It saddens me that here in America, we are celebrating the killing of this deranged, pathetic, young man.’

It gave her no solace.

‘No! Not at all! If the circumstances had been different, Jim probably would have befriended that man and tried to help him’.

She regretted the concentration of resources on revenge rather than on protecting our citizens and helping the vulnerable. ‘I am sorry,’ she said softly. ‘Jim would have been devastated with the whole thing. Jim was a peacemaker. He wanted to know how we could figure out why, why all this is happening.’

Asked if she got a sense of justice from the drone strike, she replied ‘Justice! No. Not at all. Just sad’

Diane Sawyer

For the hard-of-thinking, I'm no fan of Corbyn or Jihadi John

I just don't think the killing of him has achieved much beyond a momentary 'high' for those who want revenge.

But if you think that's the end of beheadings and other grotesque murders then we must agree to differ. It'll be 'Jihadi Jeff (or Janet even) next month

Sad that this woman lost her son but it doesn't mean she is right in what she says.
Most others see it differently including some that have suffered a loss as well.

True - but it gives here a greater moral imperative than any keyboard warrior in here I'd suggest

But if you think that's the end of beheadings and other grotesque murders then we must agree to differ. It'll be 'Jihadi Jeff (or Janet even) next month

I think everybody is aware of that Roger but what's the alternative? Let them live and carry on?

But if you think that's the end of beheadings and other grotesque murders then we must agree to differ. It'll be 'Jihadi Jeff (or Janet even) next month

Not so sure keyboard warrior is the correct term for peep agreeing with his death.
Hard not to feel frustrated when we see the hate preachers not only being allowed to carry on but live at our expense on occasions (ie on benefits) so when something like this happens it helps.

Roger thinks we should invite Jihadi John round for a cup of tea and biscuits and kindly ask him not to do it again. That should work a treat.

Get a grip Roger, its the likes of yourself and soft lefties that are partially to blame for the huge increase in muslims in Europe and the inviting of terrorists in to mainland Europe to commit such atrocities we saw in Paris. "Let all refugees in, im sure they are  all ok"

Then huge parts of the UK are now muslim only areas demanding everything they can get away. The leftie liberals have let these people get away with everything.

You make some interesting points maleuk01

Completely wrong of course, as one is prone to do when one starts gobbing off on limited evidence, but interesting (in a random, mentalist way) nonetheless

again roger, you spout off a load of nonsense.

Nothing as to what should happen to the likes of jihadi john, nothing about whether mass immigration from countries like Syria pose serious terrorism threats.

Keep burying your head in the sand roger, after all it will be the problem of your kids/grandkids and not yours. A very irresponsible attitude you are taking.

Your all mouth and just as dangerous as the terrorists for your complete lack of understanding or accepting your views to let mass immigration of muslims into Europe as dangerous.

rogerthebutler  • November 16, 2015 8:55 PM GMT 
You make some interesting points maleuk01
Completely wrong of course, as one is prone to do when one starts gobbing off on limited evidence, but interesting (in a random, mentalist way) nonetheless

Ironically that's about the only post that could be classified as from a keyboard warrior.

Corbyn and the Labour Party have no-where to go with this. They are a laughing stock and there is no way "middle England" would entrust them to deal with such a threat as ISIS

The talking only worked with the IRA when they began to lose the terrorist initiative in Northern Ireland. When the world starts to attack in earnest we may see IS push out feelers for discussion ?

Nov 16, 2015 -- 9:19PM, Leemo wrote:

Corbyn and the Labour Party have no-where to go with this. They are a laughing stock and there is no way "middle England" would entrust them to deal with such a threat as ISIS

who cares what middle england thinks

Nov 16, 2015 -- 9:43PM, anxious wrote:

Nov 16, 2015 --  9:19PM, Leemo wrote:Corbyn and the Labour Party have no-where to go with this. They are a laughing stock and there is no way "middle England" would entrust them to deal with such a threat as ISISwho cares what middle england thinks

The process of electing our PM's "cares" about what Middle England think. This travesty is the worse thing that could have happened to Labour from a political POV. Look, history tells us that the Tories are best placed to handle these affairs. Churchill in WW2 and Maggie in teh Falkland. Thankfully the right have balls when it comes to dealing with such situations

thatcher in the falklands  a little battle 6 thousand miles away, sure it cheered the little englanders up while there  was 4 million unemployed and riots on our streets

talk about you can fool some of the people some of the time

Its a daft question , as it will never happen

for me he  is 1/100 to be ousted as party leader before the next election , having him as leader will give the tories 10 years more


It is simply inconceivable that the labour people would ever countenance that


he is a million to one shot to be PM



imo

Look at the state of the country before Margaret Thatcher took over.
Saved us from the communists who were hell bent on destroying the UK.
Then gave the Argies a hiding and slapped the faces of the US politicians at the same time.
What a woman.

More pits closed under Labour than the Tories.

Poor anxious. He's like a pin ball getting smashed about on every forum he goes on.

Nov 16, 2015 -- 3:07PM, john92 wrote:

he said it was wrong to kill jihadi johnUtter bullsh1t. Here is what Corbyn said"We await identification of the person targeted in last night’s US air attack in Syria. It appears Mohammed Emwazi has been held to account for his callous and brutal crimes. However, it would have been far better for us all if he had been held to account in a court of law.“These events only underline the necessity of accelerating international efforts, under the auspices of the UN, to bring an end to the Syrian conflict as part of a comprehensive regional settlement."

thats how stupid corbyn is.these people are not for trying in a court of law kill them thats it

look at this scenario which would most likely happen

you capture jihadi john you parade him on tv saying you are doing the right thing trial by jury

isis then kidnap 100 tourists and say if you dont return him they get their heads cut off filmed live on the internet

wake up and smell the coffee you do gooder fit for nothing limp wristed liberals

Nov 17, 2015 -- 12:07AM, dukeofpuke wrote:

Nov 16, 2015 --  3:07PM, john92 wrote:he said it was wrong to kill jihadi johnUtter bullsh1t. Here is what Corbyn said"We await identification of the person targeted in last night’s US air attack in Syria. It appears Mohammed Emwazi has been held to account for his callous and brutal crimes. However, it would have been far better for us all if he had been held to account in a court of law.“These events only underline the necessity of accelerating international efforts, under the auspices of the UN, to bring an end to the Syrian conflict as part of a comprehensive regional settlement."thats how stupid corbyn is.these people are not for trying in a court of law kill them thats itlook at this scenario which would most likely happenyou capture jihadi john you parade him on tv saying you are doing the right thing trial by juryisis then kidnap 100 tourists and say if you dont return him they get their heads cut off filmed live on the internetwake up and smell the coffee you do gooder fit for nothing limp wristed liberals

Whereas the assassination of Osama Bin Laden rather than any attempt to bring him to trial worked too.

Doubt there's anything like a perfect solution that would solve both the inherent problems and also satisfy both sides of the argument on the Western view.

Duke

I fear Corbyn speaks as an intelligent man about ideal best case scenarios which comply with how we have lectured the world about our virtues for the best part of a couple of hundred years. He's still thinking like a back bencher and not a leader. People expect more simplistic statements from leaders absent of nuance.

As I've said before what I'd like him to be asked and answer honestly would be whether if he couldn't get first prize he would settle for second prize of them being smoked?

That would tell us a lot about Corbyn.

Ok maleuk just for you.

If you'd have used some of that intellect to do a cursory search of my posting history instead of making thoroughly overarching and erroneous conclusions about my politics you might have come across this....

Britain signs up to accepting an agreed fair quota of refugees (not economic migrants as far as can be determined).

We build camps throughout the UK where these refugees and their families must stay for two years. There they will receive three meals a day, they will be clothed, and their religious principles will be recognised. Surely this is a far better option than where they have come from?

In return these refugees work in local industries, without pay, for those two years.

In addition to working in these industries, refugees must learn English and attend citizenship classes. The precise curriculum of these classes can be debated elsewhere but should cover all aspects of British history, leisure pursuits, culture (from the works of Benjamin Britten to Monty Python) and the study of other religions.

All refugees should return to the camp every night.

At the end of the two years, each refugee should pass a test in written and oral English, on English cultural norms. They should then watch as a copy of the Qu'oran, plus the Talmud and Bible is burned in front of them, along with the Union Jack, the flag of their (previous) home nation and the Israeli flag.

Having done all this, every refugee will be given the greatest gift they could ever possess - a British Passport.

If they continually fail to return to camp - they are deported to their country of origin
If they engage in any illegal activity - they are deported to their country of origin
If they fail to engage sufficiently with the 'Citizenship process' - they are deported to their country of origin
If they cannot stand to watch national and religious emblems burned (the ultimate test of one's belief in 'freedom' and the pre-eminence of secular freedom over religious freedom that underpins the British way of life) - they are deported to their country of origin.

How will this be paid for?

By levying greater corporation tax on companies benefitting from free labour for two years and by engaging with the Third Sector in all aspects of the process from the clothing and feeding of the refugees to their citizenship classes.


Why all this?

Imagine being so in love with a notion of Britain that you would risk not only your own life but those of your children to establish a home here. A large percentage of our population do not give a sh1t about their moral responsibilities to the Nation (although they know plenty about their rights, both legal and economic).

Anyone that in love with Britain is a friend of mine. I'd have them as my next door neighbour in a heartbeat, because I have more in common with a Muslim / Hindu / Jew / Innuit Eskimo who is prepared to work hard, want a better life for their kids and who might teach me a thing or twenty about a life I (for the grace of being born in Britain) will never know than I do with a bone-idle Little Englander, moaning about how they took a sh1t last week and the Council still haven't been round to flush the toilet yet.

Of course, this will never happen since it will pi$$ off the Left ('Concentration Camps!!! Denial of basic freedoms!! Human rights abuse!!') and the Right ('Just GIVE them a passport! How dare you! They weren't born here!! How would you like whole families living next to you?') and I'm just a mouthy gobsh1te on the Internet, aren't I?


Not too lefty / liberal / Guardianista / pro-Corbyn or whatever easily categorised drivel on the basis of zero-evidence drivel you choose to come out with, I trust?

Ricky lake • November 16, 2015 10:10 PM GMT
Its a daft question , as it will never happen

for me he  is 1/100 to be ousted as party leader before the next election , having him as leader will give the tories 10 years more

The actual odds are 8/13.

If you fancy something bigger, exit dates: 2016 - 5/2, 2017 - 9/2, 2018 - 12/1, 2019 - 12/1, 2020 - 9/2, 2021 or later 10/1.

"he is a million to one shot to be PM "

Don't forget he was 100-1 to be leader !

Corbyn and his types are pacifists, appeasers and terrorist sympathisers.

Perhaps they would like explain how the Yazidi people have been oppressing muslims.

8-1 to be next PM, here are a few shorter than 1,000,000-1:

Diane Abbott, Nigel Farage, Alex Salmond all 200/1, Tony Blair and Nick Clegg both 250/1,

Don't forget he was 100-1 to be leader !

The Labour Party are easier to take control of than the main Electorate.
Reminiscent of the Communists gaining control of the Unions in the 60s and 70s by the simple means of attending the AGMs and voting themselves into the top jobs when the rank and file members couldn't be bothered to attend or vote.

strange for a bloke like leemo who likes to give us lessons in history,that he forgets recent history and the torys complete and abject failure in lybia,how anyone considers a war on basicaly who looks after the sheep in the falklands as a history lesson in warfare doesnt deserve our ear

But right now who have labour got worth becoming a future PM ????? 

Corbyn became leader mainly because weakness of the others. 

And whatever happened to Ed Stone, where is he now ???  That Miliband bloke who put his pledges in stone to be placed in Downing St Garden if he won the last election. Most leaders go mad when they are PM not before !

These extremeists are only interested in blowing all non-muslims to kingdom come. They dont give a fook if you are a lefty tw@t or hard right, you will meet the same end. So for all you do gooders who dont mind terrorists in our midst, you wont be saved by putting your hand up and saying i supported you.

Our priority is to protect is OUR citizens, not take the chance that IS infiltrate the mass of refugees.

Indeed, as was proved in Paris on Friday night.

thatcher in the falklands  a little battle 6 thousand miles away, sure it cheered the little englanders up while there  was 4 million unemployed and riots on our streets

The Falklands was cheered more by the working class than the middle class as anyone with a brain who lived through that will recall.

True words Treetop.

The working-classes have traditionally been the most patriotic. Of course, in the Modern Labour Party, being a patriot is the number one sin. Little wonder Labour have lost so many votes.

so do we make our citizens more or less safe by taking part in airstrikes in syria
whether its right or wrong most people would surely say less safe, and a few extra planes wont make any difference militarily ,and if we suffer like france do we then go in for carpet bombing

Had to check my car radio was tuned in properly when they replayed an interview where he said one of his measures to combat the jihadists toting ak47s and suicide vest was to be improving community policing.

community policing,stewarding stopped suicide bombers getting inside the stadium,you want the muslims themselves to out these extremists if ,theres no bobbys on the beat to snitch to where do they go, knock on the door of the local spook,as usual you take his every word to its umpteenth degree,
i,d deffo say theres 100% more chance of community policing stopping a terrorist plot than carpet bombing syria

There is no chance of a terrorist being grassed up by a fellow muslim. The complete stopping of migrants coming in Britain would def help matters. But there are bucketloads of potential terrorists already here, and we allow preaching of western hatred to inflame matters.

Our intel services do a great job imo, and without them we would be burying our own dead along with the French.

Do we know if Corbyn has made good yet on his pledge to apologise for the Iraq War if he became Labour leader?  I heard a lot of talk about it during his campaign.

Perhaps he'd also like to apologise to Argentina for the Falklands War too, given the sensitivities of some of his supporters. While he's at it he might as well wave a white flag in the direction of ISIS, so as to keep his core voting community onboard.

I think Corbyn should start his apologising by saying sorry to his parents.  They paid for an expensive education and all he did was get 2 p!ss poor A levels, a place in a 3rd rate poly and then failed to complete his "degree".

Either he didn't try or he's thick.

My guess is that he's incredibly thick - the buffoon's a serial faiure
Thanks labour, I owe you one.

lots of high quality posts by the tories on here

They're just being kind Hanks. It's a long way down to your level but people have clearly made an effort. A little gratitude is called for.

Anxious,you clearly didn't frequent any workmen's clubs around that time and the working classes provided most of the soldier/sailors involved with the working classes' papers supporting them,albeit with a jingoistic tone. To think it was just the middle classes whilst unemployed searched industriously for work is just barmy.'

of course i forgot it changed the course of history, i remember it well the only reason there celebrations was because of the jingoism

Our first response anxious was 2 subs and 2 warships. Hardly the largest fleet ever.

Let's not forget, many on the Left were on Argentina's side during the Falklands Conflict, purely because Thatcher was PM.  I'm sure even now some of them wistfully pine for the return of Las Malvinas.

Just made it all the sweeter when Maradona scored his first against England, in Mexico.

I hope you didn't complain about Henry when he did similar to the ROI.

As anyone who knows me will testify, aka, I blamed the officials from the moment it went in. I didn't celebrate the first goal last night either, in acknowledgment that it wasn't a penalty. Hit the roof when the second went in though.

Weren't Scotland in the same group?

trying to think of a quiz question, topic heading: Odd One Out

drawing a complete blank at the moment, any thoughts?

Don't think I can help DFMS but I did hear a good one earlier:

What do Albania, Scotland, Iceland, Northern Ireland and Slovakia have in common?

Sorry, scrub Scotland.

Weren't Scotland in the same group?

Strachan keeping us fresh for the WC. Let the mugs go to the Euros.

Nov 17, 2015 -- 12:54PM, Blackrock wrote:

These extremeists are only interested in blowing all non-muslims to kingdom come. They dont give a fook if you are a lefty tw@t or hard right, you will meet the same end. So for all you do gooders who dont mind terrorists in our midst, you wont be saved by putting your hand up and saying i supported you.Our priority is to protect is OUR citizens, not take the chance that IS infiltrate the mass of refugees.

They're killing more than non-Muslims. Compare the number of westerners - of which they don't care what religious group or nationality they are - to the number of their own people they are killing.

[   This image is no longer available.   ]

I have a recurring nightmare.
Corbyn as PM and Scotland independent under wee Nicki.
Syria would be tempting.

the rednecks out in force tonight

i,m getting confused by the day the right in this country are having a few days off from campaigning to get tony blair done for war crimes to get corbyn done for treason for not agreeing to strikes on syria without un backing,it,ll all make sense one day no doubt

Cameron did stress several times in the Commons that we need to make sure that any action is not illegal. Whatever did he mean ? I wonder why he said that,any ideas ?

Because you are not allowed to wage illegal wars. It is illegal.

the US-led attack on Afghanistan in 2003 was ILLEGAL
the US-led invasion of Iraq is and was ILLEGAL
the Israeli onslaught upon Gaza is and was ILLEGAL