Why Cameron Is A Wuss Watch

Cato the Elder
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
He could have ignored the duffers in Parliament and bombed Syria in 2013 and recently in the operation against ISIS. Who cares for conventions that only get in the way of doing what is required in the moment?

“war is not so to be avoided, but is only deferred to your disadvantage”-Niccolo Machiavelli
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
He could have ignored the duffers in Parliament and bombed Syria in 2013 and recently in the operation against ISIS. Who cares for conventions that only get in the way of doing what is required in the moment?

“war is not so to be avoided, but is only deferred to your disadvantage”-Niccolo Machiavelli
Seriously you just have no understand of that quote at all. That was in the context of a great power Rome in Greece and seeking to maintain their power and position. Not allowing a great enough power in Greece which could push the Romans out. In that context war is not to be avoided, but is only defferred to your disadvantage.
0
reply
Cato the Elder
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by william walker)
Seriously you just have no understand of that quote at all. That was in the context of a great power Rome in Greece and seeking to maintain their power and position. Not allowing a great enough power in Greece which could push the Romans out. In that context war is not to be avoided, but is only defferred to your disadvantage.
Machiavelli was using that as an example of why states should not delay going to war in the false hope of gaining breathing space, as their foes will only be stronger later. The context is irrelevant.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
Machiavelli was using that as an example of why states should not delay going to war in the false hope of gaining breathing space, as their foes will only be stronger later. The context is irrelevant.
What? The entire context for the Prince was Machiavelli hoping to kick the French and Spanish out of Italy. He went though why the French failed in Italy and what they could have done differently to succeed. Within that narrative he brought up with the Romans did in Greece. Context is everything in geopolitics and understand constraint.
0
reply
Cato the Elder
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by william walker)
What? The entire context for the Prince was Machiavelli hoping to kick the French and Spanish out of Italy. He went though why the French failed in Italy and what they could have done differently to succeed. Within that narrative he brought up with the Romans did in Greece. Context is everything in geopolitics and understand constraint.
Machiavelli's advice is timeless and there is no need to artificially constrain it to context. Ofc our world is different to his, but his ideas are still constant. If Chamberlain had not deferred war with Nazi Germany, WWII could have been avoided.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
Machiavelli's advice is timeless and there is no need to artificially constrain it to context. Ofc our world is different to his, but his ideas are still constant. If Chamberlain had not deferred war with Nazi Germany, WWII could have been avoided.
No just the war would have been different. Taking on Germany wasn't the same thing at all as France maintaining its position in Italy or Rome in Greece. Britain wasn't the major power, Germany was.
0
reply
Cato the Elder
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by william walker)
No just the war would have been different. Taking on Germany wasn't the same thing at all as France maintaining its position in Italy or Rome in Greece. Britain wasn't the major power, Germany was.
You don't get the point do you?
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
You don't get the point do you?
No because you have no point.
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
"he's a wuss for not being a dictator" :lol: I think your prioritises or a prime minister are ****ed up
0
reply
moggis
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
He's certainly been described as being much worse by many posters on the Times online forum. So yeah.

Fifty odd a Times reading posters can't all be wrong
0
reply
ebony_rose
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
He could have ignored the duffers in Parliament and bombed Syria in 2013 and recently in the operation against ISIS. Who cares for conventions that only get in the way of doing what is required in the moment?

“war is not so to be avoided, but is only deferred to your disadvantage”-Niccolo Machiavelli
Your logic is so flawed here. First of all David Cameron might be the Prime Minister, but he cannot just go around doing whatever the hell he likes - if the majority of parliament do not wish to do a certain thing, he has no power to overrule that decision, that's the whole point of the House of Commons. It's called democracy.

Secondly the fact that you're essentially describing what is in fact a clear decision to not partake in an act of war being a "wuss" shows how little you understand of the bombings in Syria. You can't just trivialise something so serious, and so deadly for the innocents trapped between the two conflicts.

That being said it appears David Cameron has in fact ignored the public opinion anyway and we are now bombing Syria - which is pointless and something I obviously don't agree with but it appears we don't really have a choice in the matter. Got to love politicians!😒




Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Thermodynamite
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
He could have ignored the duffers in Parliament and bombed Syria in 2013 and recently in the operation against ISIS. Who cares for conventions that only get in the way of doing what is required in the moment?

“war is not so to be avoided, but is only deferred to your disadvantage”-Niccolo Machiavelli
(Original post by william walker)
Seriously you just have no understand of that quote at all. That was in the context of a great power Rome in Greece and seeking to maintain their power and position. Not allowing a great enough power in Greece which could push the Romans out. In that context war is not to be avoided, but is only defferred to your disadvantage.
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
Machiavelli was using that as an example of why states should not delay going to war in the false hope of gaining breathing space, as their foes will only be stronger later. The context is irrelevant.
(Original post by william walker)
What? The entire context for the Prince was Machiavelli hoping to kick the French and Spanish out of Italy. He went though why the French failed in Italy and what they could have done differently to succeed. Within that narrative he brought up with the Romans did in Greece. Context is everything in geopolitics and understand constraint.
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
Machiavelli's advice is timeless and there is no need to artificially constrain it to context. Ofc our world is different to his, but his ideas are still constant. If Chamberlain had not deferred war with Nazi Germany, WWII could have been avoided.
(Original post by william walker)
No just the war would have been different. Taking on Germany wasn't the same thing at all as France maintaining its position in Italy or Rome in Greece. Britain wasn't the major power, Germany was.
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
You don't get the point do you?
(Original post by william walker)
No because you have no point.
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
"he's a wuss for not being a dictator" :lol: I think your prioritises or a prime minister are ****ed up
(Original post by moggis)
He's certainly been described as being much worse by many posters on the Times online forum. So yeah.

Fifty odd a Times reading posters can't all be wrong
(Original post by ebony_rose)
Your logic is so flawed here. First of all David Cameron might be the Prime Minister, but he cannot just go around doing whatever the hell he likes - if the majority of parliament do not wish to do a certain thing, he has no power to overrule that decision, that's the whole point of the House of Commons. It's called democracy.

Secondly the fact that you're essentially describing what is in fact a clear decision to not partake in an act of war being a "wuss" shows how little you understand of the bombings in Syria. You can't just trivialise something so serious, and so deadly for the innocents trapped between the two conflicts.

That being said it appears David Cameron has in fact ignored the public opinion anyway and we are now bombing Syria - which is pointless and something I obviously don't agree with but it appears we don't really have a choice in the matter. Got to love politicians!😒




Posted from TSR Mobile
Name:  CXFU1S4WQAAD8Q0.jpg
Views: 143
Size:  15.9 KB
0
reply
Cato the Elder
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by ebony_rose)
Your logic is so flawed here. First of all David Cameron might be the Prime Minister, but he cannot just go around doing whatever the hell he likes - if the majority of parliament do not wish to do a certain thing, he has no power to overrule that decision, that's the whole point of the House of Commons. It's called democracy.

Secondly the fact that you're essentially describing what is in fact a clear decision to not partake in an act of war being a "wuss" shows how little you understand of the bombings in Syria. You can't just trivialise something so serious, and so deadly for the innocents trapped between the two conflicts.

That being said it appears David Cameron has in fact ignored the public opinion anyway and we are now bombing Syria - which is pointless and something I obviously don't agree with but it appears we don't really have a choice in the matter. Got to love politicians!😒




Posted from TSR Mobile
You don't understand the British constitution. Cameron has the power to take the country to war using an Orders in Council, which is part of the royal prerogative. It was entirely his decision to take the matter to Parliament, a precedent that started with Tony Blair and his decisions to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. He didn't need Parliament's permission. He simply chose to ask them in order to secure "legitimacy" for the project. He chose, rather than using his powers to make the right decision, to ask Parliament, and so commence a weeks-long bullying campaign by the unwashed mob in constituencies across the country, in order to intimidate MPs into making a decision.

I understand much more about the situation in Syria then you ever will, little missy. I am not lost as to the seriousness of this conflict. Cameron's unwillingness to see it through to its logical conclusion is an excellent measure of his own lack of manliness, his innate weakness, his insecurity.

It's a good thing that the worthless opinion of the public was set aside in this case. Democracy leads to weakness and breeds corruption and mob rule. Your politicians rule over you because they have earned that right, and you have not. The bombing is most certainly not "pointless", as it has succeeded in rolling back ISIS. You would know this, if you watch the news.

See how I know more about the conflict than you?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
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

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (370)
67.27%
No (180)
32.73%

Watched Threads

View All