How do Chit Chatters vote on bombing Syria?

In the same week that the world is talking about global emissions - just what is the carbon footprint of a jet fighter dropping its payload of explosives.

In the same week that the world is talking about global emissions - just what is the carbon footprint of a jet fighter dropping its payload of explosives.

In the same week that the world is talking about global emissions - just what is the carbon footprint of a jet fighter dropping its payload of explosives.

Sorry....internet jamming up.

the problem is that very few know what is needed or understand the ramifications

I need to think through this but when have the bombers decided an issue.

they have an effect - sometimes quite catastrophic

I do believe the 2 nukes on japan maybe a singular example

but otherwise??

is anyone finding the forums slow tonight

you could say nukes where the ground force aswell

It's fcked tonight mobo.

yeah a bit like me haha

and me.

But you haven't caught  islamaphobia or become a terrorist sympathiser like me - courtesy of ebulgerry and out wonderful prime minister
I am receiving treatment for the first(I hope ebulgerry will help there) and retraining camp set up by the tories

"But you haven't caught  islamaphobia" absolutely not!! I'm hiring a 'Robin' (boy wonder) outfit so I can join in the fun when I see a friend of Batman, eg, If I see one going into a supermarket I will join Her (??) and say something (while punching an open palm) like, Holy Cow Batman!! have you seen the price of those Brussels sprouts!! Daylight robbery!! etc, etc, such fun to be had.

BOGOF Batman springs to mind.

The Syrian Civil War (Arabic: الحرب الأهلية السورية‎) is an ongoing multisided armed conflict with international interventions taking place in Syria.
The unrest began in the early spring, March of 2011 within the context of Arab Spring protests,
In the past 4 Years, Over 8,000 Bombs have been dropped by America, France, and Russia,
Any Progress??.

The Syrian Civil War (Arabic: الحرب الأهلية السورية‎) is an ongoing multisided armed conflict with international interventions taking place in Syria.
The unrest began in the early spring, March of 2011 within the context of Arab Spring protests,
In the past 4 Years, Over 8,000 Bombs have been dropped by America, France, and Russia,
Any Progress??.

Hilary Benn gone way down in my estimation, that speech was more about himself positioning himself for party leader IMO.

Hammond says this vote will make Britain safer tonight.
More subterfuge, how the hell would he know that? It's just as likely to encourage cells to act on their own in response and the Isis pipe up after saying they did it.

This is about Britain getting invited to the bombing campaign and the politicians skipping along and joining in the party to send others in to bomb from relative safety. It's about not having to front upto Russia for them bombing the wrong type of terrorist because they don't have the balls to take on anyone who has the same technology and all results in Syria being the battleground of all previous power struggles.

Don't overdue the sarcasm mobo, I have noted your change of tactic

As an islamaphobe (courtesy of ebulgerry) and a terrorist sympathiser (kamaroon) I think Benn's speech was horrific. A Benn who is a warmonger - amazing stuff.
Don't they realise bombing is for softening up and while their heads are down you go in with the troops to finish them off? So what I am saying is it won't achieve what, these mainly ignorant, politicians think it will.
They will dig in and crawl out of the rubble and carry on - but ask this - what will happen to the rest of the population, infrastructure, water etc ?? I know about these things and it will be horrific if they actually bomb raqqa  (if they do).  Look at the state of the yemen.
There is more danger to us in our own country with 450 returnees walking the straights (trained ideologically and militarily)and there is an organisation promoting the caliphate currently doing a tour!!!  I think we need to look over our shoulders than look at syria.  The russians yanks and french can get on with it.

I really pity Syria, I cant imagine what a 5hitpot that country is now/will be.
It's history and culture washed away and it's people smashed from all sides and all believing they are the virtuous ones and not using Syria as some stooge being used for their own reasons.

.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4fUI31z3lc

will be nothing left soon

desperate

Hillary Benn two weeks ago

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hilary-benn-shadow-foreign-secretary-says-labour-wont-back-air-strikes-on-syria-a6734651.html

Benn is an absolute cretin and his speech was a boat of 5hit.

Bomb an oilfield to start with. Tells you all you need to know.

Hope they all get deselected, Tories in labour clothes

Dec 3, 2015 -- 7:19AM, 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.

someone just told me they are only going to bomb their hqs, comms and oil etc  - if that is the case then nothing much will change as far as eradicating daesh

anyway they have move HQ to lybia!!  I thought everyone knew that.

ps the one to watch out for is eragooon  the the new imperirialist who is expanding the ottoman empire as we speak

an odious man

imperialist

yes there may be carnage in the labour wards and constituencies when re-selection comes round

anyone think it strange that they haven't been bombing the oilfields!!??

I bet erdagooon the great of ottoman has a big dent in his bank balance now he isnt getting as much oil

did you know you can get two years if you insult the president of ottoman

Russians have proof the Turks are buying Daesh Oil

Chickens will be coming home to roost soon !

Erdogan currently has someone in court for likening him to Gollum (or maybe Sméagol?). There's some confusion.

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.

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.

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,”

can uk bomb if Russia put troops on ground

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

a mess is being kind

one safe assumption is that there won't be both Turkish and Russian forces in the same territory...at least lets hope not

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

Cost of bombing Syria ‘would be in low tens of millions’ – George Osborne

We can keep this quote for future reference

Cost of doing eff all will be much higher than that. Keep this quote as well.

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

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

It's obviously debatable but I'd have thought that anything that hits at ISIS is worth the money.

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?

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

Apologies not what I meant.
I meant the actual costings for money spent on bombs, airplanes, military personnel, etc. Doing the job expenses.

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

*Yet

I'm obviously not expressing myself very well.
When costs of £xmillion are mentioned where does the money go?

arms companies

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)

I've worked for 9 of them.

Anyone want to buy a MG3?

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?

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

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!

"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.

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.

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!

"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.

daesh were sponsored by the US amongst other

We all make mistakes, mobo.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Hillary Bennn voted for Iraq & Syria

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

Seeming as some 87% of the public are against bombing, and they, or we, are apparently 'terrorist sympathizers,' cameron should employ the armed sevices to bomb the shyte out of the uk.

SICK OF HEARING

brimstone missiles very little collateral damage

Tony Broke: "Seeming as some 87% of the public are against bombing,
Cite a source for this. Or anything like it. It's the opposite of the truth.

ITV ..and certain other sites actually use incorrect phrasing, such as yougov...ie. supporting action against isis instead of saying, bombing Syria.'

It's all kicking off in east afghan - I tell yer, we will end up talking to them - already they are with the taliban and have been for some while.

Bombing don't work unless you follow up immediately with tanks and infantry.

I speak as a TERRORIST SYMPATHISER(courtesy of Kamaroon) and an ISLAMAPHOBE (courtesy of ebulgerry)

IF I HEAR ANOTHER TWOT ON SKY SAY 'MODERATE' to describe the 101 terrorist groups fighting Assad in Syria, I am going to fling this laptop at the tv screen!!!

they are cameron's proxy army that he used to get his bombing campaign (along with the chief whip)
just nobody has told them yet

Former Republican presidential nominee John McCain said the extension of British military bombing into Syria would amount to "some token aircraft" that would not make "a significant difference” in the fight against the IS.

Speaking to the BBC, the Arizona Senator said it would be useful to have the UK on board as an ally, however a British campaign would only represent "a few bombs" dropped by the RAF.

"We will have some token aircraft over there from the British and they'll drop a few bombs, and we'll say thank you very much."

.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/12/02/john-mccain-britain-bombing-syria_n_8699016.html

Our politicans dont want the french cosying up too closely to the states with out us....'we' are their puppet not them!

Ian Bell  Sunday Herald

Hillary Benn

IT isn’t often that a rousing speech on socialist internationalism is rewarded with a full transcript in the Spectator. In fact, it never happens. The Tory Party’s newsletter is funny like that.

Last Wednesday night, nevertheless, Hilary Benn had barely finished opposing the Government by agreeing with them than his every word was up on the Speccie website. If you hadn’t heard the Shadow Foreign Secretary speak, you might have thought the journal was making a satirical point. Instead, it was joining general adulation.

We had, it seems, witnessed one of the great Commons speeches of modern times. While MPs cheered, applauded and wept grateful tears, Benn was transformed suddenly into the saviour of his nation and his party. Acclaim was heard, said TV commentators with a shaky sense of political geography, “from all sides”.


It would have been slightly more accurate to say that those who supported the Government’s case for bombing in Syria were well-chuffed. Some seemed to think Benn had also taken out Jeremy Corbyn, Labour’s "terrorist sympathiser" in chief. A single speech endorsing an attempt to kill off Islamic State was lauded, in any case, as a triumph for parliamentary democracy.

An interesting claim, if true, and a still more interesting claim if false. The difference between resounding oratory and a great speech is that the latter depends on coherent argument. The former can get by, and is sometimes better off, without it. You don’t have to go back to Cicero to find phrase-makers playing fast and loose with the truth: that’s politics. Benn did something else: in place of argument, he gave the Commons gallery emotion, otherwise known as “passion”.

So said the reviews, at any rate. In practical terms, he simply made it a great deal harder for Labour to take on the Government if and when things go wrong in Syria. Politically speaking, he reduced a divided official opposition to fragments. Since national security was the issue, and not Labour politics, he might be forgiven for that. The Tories certainly applauded him for it. But what did Benn actually say?


Straight from the rhetorician’s handbook (and the Government script), he deployed a false opposition. In his telling, there was a choice between “doing something” and doing nothing. The UN itself, Benn said, is asking us to do this unspecified something. “So the question for each of us – and for our national security – is this: given that we know what they are doing, can we really stand aside and refuse to act fully in our self-defence against those who are planning [these] attacks?”

A stirring passage. The problem would be that no-one, even the pacifistic surrender monkey Corbyn, has advocated doing nothing. Some, like the Labour leader, actually share the Government’s view that the only hope of a lasting settlement lies with the Vienna Process of talks. Others, like the SNP, have advocated an array of actions to deprive IS of oil wealth, arms, internet propaganda, access to financial systems and patrons in Muslim countries.

Certain of these actions, particularly if they challenge Turkey and Saudi Arabia, would unsettle David Cameron far more than bombing raids. They could alter political realities in the region to better effect than a few more missiles and piles of rubble. Benn simply said, in a hurried couple of sentences, that such things can happen while bombing goes on. The singular fact remains that no-one has advocated standing aside. No-one is in favour of nothing.

Benn knew this. As Shadow Foreign Secretary, he also knew perfectly well that there is no such thing as military action without ramifications. Somehow, though, his peroration did not take him in the direction of any of those. What about the 70,000 local ground troops allegedly waiting to finish the job begun with air power? The Shadow Foreign Secretary said just two things.

First, a little way short of an oratorical peak, he noted that “there’s been much debate about the figure of 70,000 and the Government must, I think, better explain that”. So the purveyors of derided hogwash had “better explain” their hogwash? Benn then argued that it doesn’t matter how many available fighters await the call – unless the number is zero, presumably – but their number will not be increasing while we wait. He’s heard of warfare, then.

What entranced Tories and the Labour right, nevertheless, was Benn’s invocation of his party’s traditions. Here was the fight against the fascists, as of old. Here was the struggle as the International Brigaders knew the struggle, as the volunteers against Hitler and Mussolini knew the struggle. Except it isn’t. The lazy old left-wing habit of deeming every repulsive opponent a fascist now afflicts all sorts, but the ghoulish theocrats of IS don’t in any sense fit the bill. Benn was abusing language for the sake of a heroic Labour self-image.

That was almost incidental. As his roll-call of battle honours rang out, you waited for words that never came. Spain, the Hitler war, the founding of the UN, a party that had always stood up for rights and justice. Labour and Britain, said Benn, “must confront this evil”. Then it was plain: there had been not a mention, at any point, of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya from a politician who had voted for each of those catastrophes.

There was not a single sentence, for that matter, on the most important issue of all. Cameron and all the others eager to “do something” had also failed to address the point. What follows if bombing fails? Those of us who think the course chosen by the Commons is witless and reckless still want to hear an answer. It is one thing to say, as government apologists say, that you cannot predict every outcome. Nevertheless, any plan worth the name should at least contain a footnote on what might need to be done if sceptics are proved right.

Benn was applauded after saying not a word – not one – about what should be done if IS does not succumb even after every last strategic and diplomatic domino falls as the coalition desires. For how long should bombing continue? Benn didn’t say. Will doing our bit in the name of solidarity and national security lead him to support the use of UK ground troops if there is an atrocity at home? Benn didn’t say.


The great, acclaimed speech managed to say very little. Like all the bombers, its author avoided the connection between war and domestic security. He did not explain why, having been wrong about three previous interventions, he had a remote chance of being right on this occasion. He did not spare much of his passion on the risk of civilian casualties, despite all we know of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

In which circumstances would Hilary Benn say “Enough” and call for the UK to stand, as he would have it, aside? If the answer is that he would never utter the word, the shadow minister had a duty to tell us what he has in mind, home and abroad, to answer for such a failure. After all, his flimsy, culpable rhetoric will have helped to make it happen.

His grandstanding was absolutely bizarre to say the least.

Excellent piece.

Strange man, Hope he is shuffled out of shadow cabinet at first opportunity.

this argument over which direction the great eastern gas pipeline will take is easily solved. I give you, Cameron's back passage.

The Sunday herald is a failing newspaper that saw the gap in the market in a fading media to be the Sunday paper for left wing Scottish Nationalists. It tells them what they want to hear - if it confronted them with something they didn't want to hear, they wouldn't buy it. That xmoneyx, forum conspiracy theorist, quotes something that pathetic, proves nothing.

funny fing - big ben  woz against it only a short while ago

hold me up I am collapsing with laughter - what a koooont!!

I'm a forum conspiracy theorist

now look what we have been dragged into by herr kamarooon

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-led-coalition-air-strike-targets-syrian-soldiers-in-first-fatal-bombing-on-assad-regime-a6762956.html

PKK

a good watch

http://www.france24.com/en/20151113-video-reporter-pkk-kurdistan-iraq-turkey-kurds-ergodan-islamic-state?ns_campaign=reseaux_sociaux&ns_source=twitter&ns_mchannel=social&ns_linkname=emission&aef_campaign_ref=partage_user&aef_campaign_date=2015-11-13

One of the many totally nonsensical aspects of the whole situation is the following:
Last time we wanted to bomb Syria when it was obviously outvoted in the commons, it was to oust Assad. Now we have successfully decided to bomb Syria again it's to kill the people who are themselves trying to oust Assad.

I suppose the potential for a west v Russia conflict will exist there now instead of Ukraine being as we are on different sides when it comes to Assad. I think I heard on the BBC news channel this morning (though I was only half listening so I could be wrong) that the US had launched air strikes against Syrian army bases, the very people Russia are there to support.

When we launched our first air strikes the other night, about 2 minutes after the vote, we went after an oil field to disrupt the way they make money from selling oil.
Why didn't we just tell our Nato ally Turkey to stop buying it off them?

tony you silly man



did you not know the US has its own agenda - doesn't matter if it causes chaos again  and now we have joined in to bomb what little bits of targets we can find

they have been pu$$y footing around it for ages  I really despair at our approach to this
and anyone against bombing babies to bits is considered a supporter of terrorism


but the 101 groups opposing assad are fkn terrorists - the lot of them

I give up

where was I silly? I know the us has its own agenda. Theyre basically trying to isolate Russia and supporting any side which helps their own self serving interests. Im merely pointing out the hypocrisy behind our own agenda because were supposedly going after Isis which is also against Assad, who the Yanks are currently bombing the **** out of!

sorry just being ........well ironic maybe.... but yes you are right

the forum has always been 5 years ahead on many topics contrary to what is supposedly common knowledge and accepted wisdom

or what the government want you to know with their allies the tv media

Vladimir Putin has said he hopes nuclear warheads will "never be needed" in war against IS

Vlad the Inhaler in indirect threat to the Ottomans?

Ian Bell

died tonight 59

a great Scottish,journalist,writer

Ian Bell.   R.I.P



https://mobile.twitter.com/search/gallery?q=Ian%20bell&s=typd&idx=0&tid=675125412985466880

RAF warplanes launched a new mission against Islamic State from their Cypriot base overnight with the first wave of British airstrikes in Syria hitting an oilfield used by the militant group to fund its activities.
Two Tornado GR4 fighter bombers took off from RAF Akrotiri in a display of force after a decision by MPs on Wednesday to approve the extension of British airstrikes into Syria from the confines of Iraq.
Local residents, who heard the boom of seven Paveway IV bombs being dropped in the early hours of yesterday morning, said that the Oilfield had been hit multiple times Before in American and French airstrikes and was no longer functioning. Defence sources vehemently denied that this was the case.
“Those are genuine targets,” a Whitehall source said.