This discussion is closed.
Faland
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
M278 - Iraq Crisis Motion, The Hon. Ruitker MPFollowing the beheading of American journalist James Foley by a British jihadist in Iraq, this house calls on the government to urgently tighten border controls, revoke British citizenship for British jihadists who have gone to fight, initiate a full scale artillery, naval and aerial bombardment of positions, use British troops to evacuate trapped Iraqis in the mountains, increase aid for trapped Iraqis, table a UN motion calling for more nations to use military force in Iraq, focus more on integration in society between ethnic groups to prevent Britons from being caught up and inspired to join in the fighting, halt all current or further defense cuts for the foreseeable future in anticipation of British troops being involved in a possible ground intervention in Iraq, and invest in resupplying Briton's stocks of missiles for use in a bombing campaign or ground intervention.
2
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
I've just been thinking about this.
0
Ruitker
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
I apologies for the grammatical mistake I missed when proofreading in the last sentence.

On the motion, I think it's time the government actually acts to make a difference instead of doing the minimum.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
Nay. Again we're on the revocation of citizenship topic and again it's a no. I also highly doubt troops on the ground will automatically be an effective way to deal with this situation.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
I'm sure the Government will detail its official response as soon as there is a formal method/incentive to do so.


*wink wink* to the people who know what I'm talking about.
0
Ruitker
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by RayApparently)
I'm sure the Government will detail its official response as soon as there is a formal method/incentive to do so.


*wink wink* to the people who know what I'm talking about.
We're glad we beat the government to it then. It's a sad day when the government official response takes longer than a UKIP motion This must be a good ground to call a VoNC against the government.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by Ruitker)
We're glad we beat the government to it then. It's a sad day when the government official response takes longer than a UKIP motion This must be a good ground to call a VoNC against the government.
Less than 2 months from an election? That'd be pretty dodgy.

Actually I've written an amendment creating a formal structure for Government's to respond to calls (such as this). Currently we don't actually need to do anything, just argue for a bit then vote on a statement that's completely unbinding.

If you're interested in 2nding pm me.
0
Republic1
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
Wow, don't think I've ever seen a motion that calls on us to do so much.

By tighten border controls I assume you mean to stop people leaving to fight? If so then that's a good idea. I haven't made my mind up on citizenship - firstly we can't revoke their citizenship if they don't hold another passport (their so called ISIS citizenship doesn't count). Assuming they do, I don't imagine they will care if we revoke their citizenship. They're anti-UK jihadists after all. I think it would be better to prosecute these people (assuming we could get a hold of them) in the ICC.

No to the military bombardment obviously. Yes to evacuating Iraqis and increasing aid. Yes to getting the UN involved but not in the gung-ho way you suggest.

The bit about community integration is good, but then it's followed by a ridiculous suggestion to beef up the UK military.

It's a shame because there are some sensible things tucked in there amongst some silly things. Nay from me.
0
James222
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by O133)
Nay. Again we're on the revocation of citizenship topic and again it's a no. I also highly doubt troops on the ground will automatically be an effective way to deal with this situation.
This


Nay nay nay

Was the journalist kidnapped from the streets of Britain ? law enforcement in iraq is the job of the iraqi govt


Stripping citizenship is illegal under international law and once you allow it it becomes very subjective in how the govt of the day will apply it
0
Ruitker
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by Republic1)
Wow, don't think I've ever seen a motion that calls on us to do so much.

By tighten border controls I assume you mean to stop people leaving to fight? If so then that's a good idea. I haven't made my mind up on citizenship - firstly we can't revoke their citizenship if they don't hold another passport (their so called ISIS citizenship doesn't count). Assuming they do, I don't imagine they will care if we revoke their citizenship. They're anti-UK jihadists after all. I think it would be better to prosecute these people (assuming we could get a hold of them) in the ICC.

No to the military bombardment obviously. Yes to evacuating Iraqis and increasing aid. Yes to getting the UN involved but not in the gung-ho way you suggest.

The bit about community integration is good, but then it's followed by a ridiculous suggestion to beef up the UK military.

It's a shame because there are some sensible things tucked in there amongst some silly things. Nay from me.
Yes, the border controls means preventing them leaving and entering on return (they try to enter but are instantly arrested/trialed/jailed)

The military bombardment is joining in with the US and encouraging allies to help to support the Kurds fighting in that region.

You misunderstand the final point. It doesn't call to beef up the military but stop defence cuts. Some fighter bombers are due to be scrapped soon but this motion would prevent that just in case they are needed. After Libya, the used up missiles were not replaced so the UK has a shortage of them. This motion would call for the supplies to be topped up to enable us to join in with the bombardment led by the Americans.

The motion is entirely reasonable and being considered by the RL government.

(Original post by James222)
Stripping citizenship is illegal under international law and once you allow it it becomes very subjective in how the govt of the day will apply it
Actually it's not provided the citizens were not citizens by birth. The UK passed laws earlier this year to allow the government to strip citizenship for this very need. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/15/wo...tizenship.html
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
At the risk of sounding out of tune with many of my friends in Government I'm actually quite sympathetic to a lot of this.

The Islamic State is an undeniable threat to peace and I'd sleep easier if they're completely stamped out. Anyone who fights for them isn't British in any sense of the word that matters. They've chosen their side, and it certainly isn't ours - they clearly don't believe in the values that we as a country strive to uphold at home and overseas.

What has happened not just to Mr Foley but to people throughout this conflict is disgusting.
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
Agree with some of this, but tighter border controls, revoking citizenship and putting ground troops into Iraq? No thank you!
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
Interesting, we'll discuss this as government since all our ideas seem to vary a bit.

So, urgently tighten border controls? No, a typical UKIP response and just a knee-jerk reaction, nicely snuck in however.

Revoke British citizenship for British jihadists who have gone to fight? This I could be swayed, I need more details on what this would exactly involve, but this is something I'd be considering.

Initiate a full scale artillery, naval and aerial bombardment of positions? I've said that I would be averse to general intervention, but if we do, I'd focus on aerial bombardments. Again, this is really too knee-jerk to simply do because of the James Foley incident.

Use British troops to evacuate trapped Iraqis in the mountains? I would support this, but would prefer this being a multi-nation combined mission of sorts.

Increase aid for trapped Iraqis? Of course.

Table a UN motion calling for more nations to use military force in Iraq, no, hypocritical unless we intervene ourselves.

Focus more on integration in society between ethnic groups to prevent Britons from being caught up and inspired to join in the fighting, of course.

Halt all current or further defense cuts for the foreseeable future in anticipation of British troops being involved in a possible ground intervention in Iraq, and invest in resupplying Briton's stocks of missiles for use in a bombing campaign or ground intervention? Not something I feel like I support unless landscape changes drastically.
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
Would be interesting to see how Iraq would do in the UN Security Council, actually. I'm sure Russia and China want action against the Islamic State but not in the form of another NATO adventure.
0
Jean-Luc Picard
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
Nay.

none of this is needed, most of it will make things far worse rather than better as well.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
We did just pass a motion but as this calls for military action I will vote Aye.

I don't see a point going through the UN though, Russia will Veto. Get the USA, UK and France and have Turkey let us fly from there and bomb Syria as well.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by Blue Meltwater)
Would be interesting to see how Iraq would do in the UN Security Council, actually. I'm sure Russia and China want action against the Islamic State but not in the form of another NATO adventure.
China would abstain, Russia would veto.

Russia is a pariah and I hope in a future motion the House will support greater sanctions.
0
Ruitker
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
(Original post by Jean-Luc Picard)
Nay.

none of this is needed, most of it will make things far worse rather than better as well.
It's nice to know none of this is needed. Children, women and men are being slaughtered and you say they don't aid, help, or to be evacuated from the mountains. Nice to know.

If my children were being slaughtered and someone could do something to help, I would want that person to help. Here we can help and they want us to help them.
0
Jean-Luc Picard
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#19
Report 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by Ruitker)
It's nice to know none of this is needed. Children, women and men are being slaughtered and you say they don't aid, help, or to be evacuated from the mountains. Nice to know.

If my children were being slaughtered and someone could do something to help, I would want that person to help. Here we can help and they want us to help them.
they need aid form the international community not from the UK doing it just to justify ****ing bombing & arming the people there.

I see, so do you care so much about kids in Africa? in Palestine? in the UK? probably not because that can't be used to justify jingoistic nonsense.
0
Ruitker
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
(Original post by Jean-Luc Picard)
they need aid form the international community not from the UK doing it just to justify ****ing bombing & arming the people there.

I see, so do you care so much about kids in Africa? in Palestine? in the UK? probably not because that can't be used to justify jingoistic nonsense.
Yes, I do care about children in those countries but they aren't being lined up and beheaded in their thousands by men waving knives. Aid is given to such people and the aid workers are in relative safety, Palestine also as the ceasefire seems to be working so far. Iraq is not a similar situation. Technically it's not jingoism as Iraq has asked for international help and peaceful diplomatic solutions failed when the policy of forcing people to convert to Islam or die continued.

Still, it's nice to know you want to sit back and just watch thousands of innocent people be slaughtered. I forgot, mass slaughter is all ok for you provided it is not your family being killed.
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

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (14)
7.07%
They might tell the bully (20)
10.1%
I don't think they'd understand (33)
16.67%
It might lead to more bullying (72)
36.36%
There's nothing they could do (59)
29.8%

Watched Threads

View All