Forums

We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.

Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.

Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.

To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home

There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 387 comments are related to the topic:
How do Chit Chatters vote on bombing Syria?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 9 of 10  •  Previous | 1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 387
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 13:52

Dec 3, 2015 -- 7:31AM, The Leopard wrote:


Dec  3, 2015 --  1:19PM, themover wrote:Bomb an oilfield to start with. Tells you all you need to know.We have to stop them making money from the oil so they can't buy more weapons.


Stopping our "allies" from buying the oil would be a good starting point.

By:
mobo
When: 03 Dec 15 13:54
yep  two years for him haha  Erdthegoon  is just another warmonging muslim as far as I am concerned and they want to fast track the country into the eu

fkn madness

saudi the same - anyone noticed!!??  they have managed to make mincemeat of Aden.
By:
HH Sultan Vinegar
When: 03 Dec 15 14:05
Putin on the wind up -
“We were prepared to cooperate with Turkey on most sensitive issues and go further than their allies. Allah knows why they did it. Apparently Allah decided to punish the ruling clique in Turkey by taking their sanity,”

Laugh
By:
xmoneyx
When: 03 Dec 15 15:26
can uk bomb if Russia put troops on ground
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 15:52
well if Russia put in ground troops (150,000 has been talked about), they would be on the side of Assad's forces and Iranian Revolutionary Guard ie Shia dominated. The alternative is Turkey, Saudi and some other Gulf states ie Sunni. The Kurds, despite what they may say, are only interested in territory for an independent Kurdistan. All a bit of a mess Plain
By:
xmoneyx
When: 03 Dec 15 15:54
a mess is being kind
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 16:05
one safe assumption is that there won't be both Turkish and Russian forces in the same territory...at least lets hope not Cry
By:
mobo
When: 03 Dec 15 16:11
now kamaroon is telling us it will take years - we are being led by our fkn noses here - sack the lot of the politicoes
they haven't fkn clue

either bomb the sh!t out of them and clear them out with infantry and tanks or leave them alone

let not a single syrian, african or any other into europe and definitely not into the uk
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 16:18
Cost of bombing Syria ‘would be in low tens of millions’ – George Osborne

We can keep this quote for future reference Tongue Out
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 16:25
Cost of doing eff all will be much higher than that. Keep this quote as well.
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 16:27
As Iraq is costing £200 million a year to bomb you wouldn't be able to say Britain was doing eff all, with or without bombing Syria
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 16:33
David Cameron says launching UK air strikes against Islamic State militants in Syria will "make us safer".

Must have missed the militants and hit an oil field by accident Laugh
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 16:36
It's obviously debatable but I'd have thought that anything that hits at ISIS is worth the money.
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 16:38
And i'm sure it's been said many times before but i'll say it again: all this money that is spent on bombing where does it go to?
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 16:47
The routes to the Omar oilfields were destroyed in past air-strikes by the US and Russians (The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitor said a coalition air raid on the Omar field destroyed pipelines and oil storage facilities)

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/10/22/
Russia-say****-ISIS-supply-route-from-Iraq-to-Syria-13.html
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 16:52
Apologies not what I meant.
I meant the actual costings for money spent on bombs, airplanes, military personnel, etc. Doing the job expenses.
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 16:55
Yes according to Fallon, the attack "strikes a very real blow at the oil, and the revenue on which the Daesh terrorists depend".

Call me sceptical but I doubt they were even operational
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 16:58
*Yet
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 17:01
I'm obviously not expressing myself very well.
When costs of £xmillion are mentioned where does the money go?
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 17:03
arms companies
By:
themover
When: 03 Dec 15 17:07
Top 10 Arms Manufacturing companies :

1. Lockheed Martin (USA)
2. Boeing (USA)
3. BAE Systems (UK)
4. Raytheon (USA)
5. Northrop Gumman (USA)
6. General Dynamics (USA)
7. EADS/Airbus (Europe)
8. United Technologies (USA)
9. Finmeccanica (Italy)
10. Thales (France)
By:
guinness2dear
When: 03 Dec 15 17:09
I've worked for 9 of them.

Anyone want to buy a MG3?
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 17:13
Thank you.
It's not all arms costs though. Even if most of it is then that keeps people in jobs and almost definitely they make a profit. Remove all the jobs and then what?
By:
GoBallistic
When: 03 Dec 15 18:22
Some of the best engineers in the world would end up on the dole ? Perhaps they could invent a new form of energy or build a base on the moon or make a betting exchange that actually works
By:
ebulGery
When: 03 Dec 15 18:36
We never have enough money for benefits, the NHS or the police

But we get the chance to fight somebody else's war, we are never short

Dorks lead this country

Unless our bombing is 'the straw that breaks the camels back' are we going to achieve anything?

If we cannot stop this civil war in Syria I doubt we will gain anything
and yes there are going to be an increasing number of Syrian refugees, and a large number will end up in Europe and here!
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 18:56
"Some of the best engineers in the world would end up on the dole ?" Military research has provided many, often over looked, everyday benefits.

"Perhaps they could invent a new form of energy" They've done that before now.

"or build a base on the moon" Mars is the goal.

"or make a betting exchange that actually works" They can't do the impossible.

"We never have enough money for benefits, the NHS or the police" A lot more immigrants will certainly not help.

"But we get the chance to fight somebody else's war, we are never short" It's our war as much as anyone else's.

"Dorks lead this country" Stating the obvious but an alternative?

"If we cannot stop this civil war in Syria I doubt we will gain anything" It's more than a civil war, parts have been invaded by ******* ********"

"and yes there are going to be an increasing number of Syrian refugees, and a large number will end up in Europe and here!" Indeed.
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 19:19
Missed one: "Unless our bombing is 'the straw that breaks the camels back' are we going to achieve anything?" Bombing alone will not be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
By:
Owmybrainhurtz
When: 03 Dec 15 19:22
Did the Syrian government invite Cameron to come and bomb their country? No! His act therefore is a criminal act against international law.

Should he be tried as a war criminal? Yes!

Will he ever be tried as a war criminal? No!
By:
Charlie
When: 03 Dec 15 19:31
"Did the Syrian government invite Cameron to come and bomb their country? No! His act therefore is a criminal act against international law."

Silly me. I forgot that ISIS were invited.
By:
mobo
When: 03 Dec 15 20:15
daesh were sponsored by the US amongst other
By:
Clouseau
When: 03 Dec 15 21:12
We all make mistakes, mobo. Cry
By:
dustybin
When: 04 Dec 15 09:30
The arms industry is just glorified product design.
To develop new innovations and improved killing systems they have to get rid of the old. They have to sell them.
If nobody is using them then it's not sustainable to create new ones, and jobs are lost and more importantly to governments investment companies don't make profits.

Hammond said the other night that 'tonight Britain is safer' (following the vote by the MPs to bomb)
His timing couldn't have been more apt, around the same time Americas were getting shot up in America by what is now believed to be people linked to extremism....and nobody bombs like America.
By:
dustybin
When: 04 Dec 15 10:04
Unfortunately it's the people with big money that shape politics, and those entities who have massive amounts to invest want guaranteed returns.
The select committee revealed only last year when questioning the energy sector that investors demanded a return on investment of 5%. Well they can when the public are over a barrel having to buy energy.
The arms industry is littered with ex politicians and rich mogul families who directly and indirectly influence policy.

Free market economics was supposed to be about letting the market decide and companies to fail, but we have learned over the last decade this is simply not the case, only certain companies are allowed to fail and returns in places are backed by governmental procedure.
The Tory party votes in parliament were 'whipped', how is that representing constituencies?
By:
Tony Broke
When: 04 Dec 15 12:52
the entire fkin government are criminals...murderers, not content with enormous numbers of disabled and jobless ending their lives, or just about scraping along on a pittance, he now decides to spend the money we werent supposed to have on war and yet more murder..those who shape the political agenda's of the world are sick, and i believe the 'west' are the ones who are the real criminals. Always have been since the 1950's.
By:
themover
When: 04 Dec 15 13:33
Germany now joining in.

"I'm working on the basis that this fight, if it is taken seriously, will go on for well over 10 years," chairman Andre Wuestner told German TV.
By:
Just Checking
When: 04 Dec 15 13:52
This thread is such a mixture of conspiracy theorists, crass ignorance, barrack room lawyers mouthing off and nutjobs I think the forum mods only keep it up to laugh at. Where do people like you live?

I mean just picking from a very rich choice, look at this cr*p: "To develop new innovations and improved killing systems they have to get rid of the old."

No, it's because the countries are always competing. It's called progress, and you try to keep up or you lose. It's why they don't use muskets and biplanes.
It's why countries that still had cavalry got slaughtered by tanks and machine guns.
FFS.
By:
dustybin
When: 04 Dec 15 14:16
Actually JC you are referring to the 'singularity' which can be described as the measurement of the speed in which innovations increase.
That doesnt tell us where the money comes from though if nobody were to buy the products.

Any private company or government spending on weapons development who dont sell them or contribute in the life cycle of the product by creating theatre of use and therefore justified tax payer funding will go broke very quickly.
By:
mobo
When: 04 Dec 15 14:17
You do know we are going to end up talking to daesh don't you.  You read it here first and amazingly from me of all people. The ISLAMAPHOBE(Courtesy of ebulgerry) and the TERRORIST SYMPATHISER (Kamroon).
We have been lied to about the 70 000 on the ground. They appear to only have just started bombing the crpp out of the oil instalations(do you know what this does)?And who was dealing in the oil!!??  Our fkn so called allies!! Who also bomb the kurds.
Daesh are the employers/paymasters in raqqa etc and the more damage you do, the more you degrade the civilian situation. No work, no money will make them even more resentful of the west and play right into the hands of daesh.
It is simple - more bombs more sympathy for daesh. After all they are all muslims but of different levels.
One expert in the UK has said there will now be more planes looking for less targets - they are not going to bomb civilians on purpose, but there will be collateral damage of course.
Now they have hit the main infrastructure in iraq and syria there will not be many targets, except a few bridges, some power points/lines, water supply  etc etc and these just mess up civilian life as much as damage daesh who are well dug in.

I have repeatedly said that if the west is serious they bomb and then go in with tanks and troops, otherwise it is a waste of time. As I have said before Daesh have moved HQ to lybia anyway.  Up till now the US has done 95 percent of the bombing with 8500 strikes overall - where has it got them ??  Perhaps some movement in Iraq but the front seems rather quiet and not much advance anywhere lately.

We also have major problems of getting the sunnis on side because they fear the shia militia more in iraq for starters.

But this is a joke to say join a bombing war to make us safe frome an attack by daesh - oh please hold me up - 1000s of miles away - yeah sure
The danger comes from mainly inside the UK and europe with 450 trained returnees walking the streets and an organisation urging support for the caliphate as it tours the uk promoting this nasty ideology.
By:
xmoneyx
When: 05 Dec 15 09:38
Hillary Bennn voted for Iraq & Syria

Cry
By:
brendanuk1
When: 05 Dec 15 11:12
what about Afghanistan? Coalition talked in the end with the Talban, be the same with isis.
Why dont they clear Iraq with ground troops? Seem not too bothered about isis in iraq, prefering to meddle in Putins sphere of influence
Page 9 of 10  •  Previous | 1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com