This discussion is closed.
Faland
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
M272 - Iraq, Syria and ISIS Motion, TSR Conservative and Unionist Party

This House believes that the current escalation of war caused by ISIS in the Middle East is deeply concerning and calls on the government to mediate a peace in the region.

This House believes that in light of current events, all financial and military aid to rebels in Syria or any groups supporting ISIS in Iraq should be stopped immediately. Further, this House believes that humanitarian aid via the Red Cross to distribute is needed and that all persons suspected of leaving the UK to fight in Iraq and Syria should be stripped of their citizenship and placed on an intelligence watch-list as suspected terrorists.

This House does recognise the conduct of the Iran and recognises that this may represent the first step towards normal relations and also calls on allies such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia to do what they can to aid peace in the region.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24179084
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
I'm sure the Prime Minister, as spokesperson to the government will be able to shed some light as to his stance on this crucial issue.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
Aye. Nice to see that the Syrian rebels are finally being recognised as as bad as the Assad régime.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
(Original post by O133)
Aye. Nice to see that the Syrian rebels are finally being recognised as as bad as the Assad régime.
I still maintain that it was a mistake not to deal with Syria when the rebels were largely still rebels (pre-2013) but they've been infected by Islamists since.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
(Original post by Rakas21)
I still maintain that it was a mistake not to deal with Syria when the rebels were largely still rebels (pre-2013) but they've been infected by Islamists since.
I have a feeling it would have been a repeat of the US arming the Taliban to fight off the Soviets.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by O133)
I have a feeling it would have been a repeat of the US arming the Taliban to fight off the Soviets.
The key difference is that Assad is and was weak (no stronger than Gadaffi really) so our air power would have been sufficient to defeat him swiftly without boots on the ground. From there, the rebels were initially pretty organised and with the army now on their side would have swiftly dealt with the Islamists. As a result of pacifism, isolationism and appeasement, 100,000 are now dead and millions displaced while terrorists have had a 3 year training camp.

When will people learn that you can't just leave countries to it.
0
ukip72
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
I agree with rakas, we should have taken military action early on.
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
I do like most of this motion, but I really don't agree with one part of it: " all persons suspected of leaving the UK to fight in Iraq and Syria should be stripped of their citizenship and placed on an intelligence watch-list as suspected terrorists."

We shouldn't be doing anything nearly as drastic as stripping people of their citizenship without the strongest evidence of serious concrete wrongdoing. Innocent until proven guilty. It would set a dreadful precedent if merely suspecting someone of an offence is enough to strip citizenship!
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by Green_Pink)
I do like most of this motion, but I really don't agree with one part of it: " all persons suspected of leaving the UK to fight in Iraq and Syria should be stripped of their citizenship and placed on an intelligence watch-list as suspected terrorists."

We shouldn't be doing anything nearly as drastic as stripping people of their citizenship without the strongest evidence of serious concrete wrongdoing. Innocent until proven guilty. It would set a dreadful precedent if merely suspecting someone of an offence is enough to strip citizenship!
Agree with this. Take it out in the second reading and you have my full support.
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
Nay. As far as I am aware there are still moderate rebels in control of some northern territory around Aleppo and some other areas in the south, who oppose ISIS as much as they do Assad. We can't lump all the anti-Assad forces into one 'extremist' category. I'd agree with Rakas21 that the situation we see today is a direct result of failing to find a solution/settlement early on (I'm not saying this settlement should necessarily have been militaristic, but the international community's policy of 'let us wait and see' has undoubtedly let the situation reach the level it's at).

Also agree with above comments about revoking citizenship, on basic human rights levels. Why are some people on the right so obsessed with revoking citizenship?
0
The Legal Eagle
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
I'm agreeing with Green_Pink, and O133's latter point.
Remove the part of citizenship stripping, or replace with citizenship stripping, "if person is found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, of intent to commit an act(s) of terror" OWTTA.
0
Birchington
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
I fully agree, aye.
0
PhysicsKid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
Aye, if the stripping of citizenship is provisional, pending further investigation. By leaning towards revoking citizenship, there is imo a sufficient deterrent without punishing innocent people.
0
Jean-Luc Picard
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by Faland)
M272 - Iraq, Syria and ISIS Motion, TSR Conservative and Unionist Party

This House believes that the current escalation of war caused by ISIS in the Middle East is deeply concerning and calls on the government to mediate a peace in the region.

This House believes that in light of current events, all financial and military aid to rebels in Syria or any groups supporting ISIS in Iraq should be stopped immediately. Further, this House believes that humanitarian aid via the Red Cross to distribute is needed and that all persons suspected of leaving the UK to fight in Iraq and Syria should be stripped of their citizenship and placed on an intelligence watch-list as suspected terrorists.

This House does recognise the conduct of the Iran and recognises that this may represent the first step towards normal relations and also calls on allies such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia to do what they can to aid peace in the region.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24179084
with the bolded included I have to vote against this, I cannot support stripping the citizenship of people, it's the kind of thing Stalin did for goodness sake.

also just lol at asking Saudi/Qatar to aid peace in the region, dream on with that one, they both hate peace, look how they treat their own populations leave alone others, we shouldn't be allied to them at all.
0
James222
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
Against stripping citizenship but support the rest.

I think people confuse isolationism with non interventionism. Its not isolationist to recongnise Western Regime change under the flag of protecting civilians has no credibility or that rebels have no political arm or popular support ala modern libya
0
tehFrance
Badges: 15
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by Jean-Luc Picard)
also just lol at asking Saudi/Qatar to aid peace in the region, dream on with that one, they both hate peace, look how they treat their own populations leave alone others, we shouldn't be allied to them at all.
Saudi Arabia are king makers of the Middle East, people stop and listen when Saudi Arabia demands something and Qatar are the largest sponsors of terror in the world although they aren't supporting Hamas anymore likewise Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia all want nothing to do with Hamas, you could say that the surrounding countries support Israeli strikes against Hamas (actually Israeli ministers stated such and no country has denied it).

Saudi Arabia and Qatar can change things likewise Iran if we continue talks with them.
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
Who's actually supporting/funding Hamas these days?
0
Jean-Luc Picard
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
(Original post by tehFrance)
Saudi Arabia are king makers of the Middle East, people stop and listen when Saudi Arabia demands something and Qatar are the largest sponsors of terror in the world although they aren't supporting Hamas anymore likewise Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia all want nothing to do with Hamas, you could say that the surrounding countries support Israeli strikes against Hamas (actually Israeli ministers stated such and no country has denied it).

Saudi Arabia and Qatar can change things likewise Iran if we continue talks with them.
no wonder the world is ****ed then.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by Blue Meltwater)
Who's actually supporting/funding Hamas these days?
I know Iran is funding Hezbolah and Assad, I think Hezbolah are on good terms with Hamas.

Most of the other Sunnis support Fatah who actually want peace with Israel.

(Original post by James222)
Against stripping citizenship but support the rest.

I think people confuse isolationism with non interventionism. Its not isolationist to recongnise Western Regime change under the flag of protecting civilians has no credibility or that rebels have no political arm or popular support ala modern libya
You may want to look at the scale of the devastation in Syria. The Un reports that 87% of businesses no longer exist so over Half the population that remains is unemployed (another 2 million have left the country). Even with 5% growth a year it will take 30 years to recover. Indeed they conclude that the level of damage is not comparable to Iraq but WW2.

Now bearing in mind the rise of ISIS and until them the steady Iraqi recovery, can you honestly say that early intervention would have created a worse outcome than today.
0
James222
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
(Original post by Rakas21)
I know Iran is funding Hezbolah and Assad, I think Hezbolah are on good terms with Hamas.

Most of the other Sunnis support Fatah who actually want peace with Israel.



You may want to look at the scale of the devastation in Syria. The Un reports that 87% of businesses no longer exist so over Half the population that remains is unemployed (another 2 million have left the country). Even with 5% growth a year it will take 30 years to recover. Indeed they conclude that the level of damage is not comparable to Iraq but WW2.

Now bearing in mind the rise of ISIS and until them the steady Iraqi recovery, can you honestly say that early intervention would have created a worse outcome than today.
Lol your using a measure of Business as a sign of devastation ? All it takes if for one bullet to go off and business confidence to collapse the rich people flee and the economy tanks that what happens on day 1
Unemployment was high to begin with, i dont see how No fly zone by the west 6 months ago would have increased employment and kept inflation below 2%

Syria was never a prosperous country the best path to peace is a victory by the Syrian Govermemt.
Yes I can, isis in syria came from iraq.ISIS in iraq came from former al qaeda members in iraq. Al qaeda came to iraq because of US troops.


The current mess in iraq is political. 40,000 troops dont loose to 2,000 militants unless they are told by their tribe to return home
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you ever signed up for an open day and then not gone to it?

Yes (99)
49.25%
No (102)
50.75%

Watched Threads

View All