Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

VS10 - Retaliative action against Daesh Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should this statement of intent be approved?
    As many are of the opinion, Aye
    33.33%
    On the contrary, No
    43.75%
    Abstain
    22.92%

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    VS10 - Retaliative action against DaeshStatement from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    After the recent events of Islamic extremists, including an attack on the Cabinet of the United Kingdom, the British Government will be formally recognising Daesh after the Joint Intelligence Committee formally identified the 11 terrorists involved in the Cabinet attack as members of Daesh. This recognition also identifies the attack on the cabinet meeting as a declaration of war through invasion, a direct threat to the British people and the country we live in. It is, with great regret therefore, that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office sees the only option left to safeguard against further invasion or other attempts to seriously injure or kill British is a direct attack on Daesh held territories. The attacks will focus on the 4 main Daesh controlled cities and the surrounding area; Kobani, Hasakah, Deir ez-Zor, and Raqqa. After discussion with the Ministry of Defence, personnel of the British Army will be transported to Iraq to await further deployment, while the Royal Navy will assemble and deploy a task force to the Mediterranean. On Cyprus, RAF Akrotiri shall be supplied with an additional 10 Tornado aircraft (currently undergoing refit) and a further 2 Reaper drones to assist in daily airstrikes against targets high in value to Daesh. This declaration of war has not been taken lightly. Member states of the European Union and NATO have been informed, along with a proposal to divide the territories claimed by Daesh amongst the UK, USA, France and Germany, until a democratically elected Government can be restored.


    Speaker's Note: This SOI references Crisis 02.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Copied from OP.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    This has been sent to vote as I feel it is essential to seek the approval of Parliament before engaging in combat.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    This has been sent to vote as I feel it is essential to seek the approval of Parliament before engaging in combat.
    I asked in the threat how retaliative action will happen when Britain has no more than ten combat jets readily available, and under 50 armoured vehicles, however, no answer was given. This motion is a case of the government wanting to do something but not having a plan of what to do, nor knowing the equipment available to do what needs to be done.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Against what now? Get the **** off with those arabic names. There's already like five of them for the same ****ing IS and I don't see what's the point. They're the still the same scum that needs to be wiped out.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I doubt the Germans would want to occupy any IS territory.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Wellzi)
    I doubt the Germans would want to occupy any IS territory.
    In which case they would be welcome to withdraw. Given we don't have a Model Bundestag yet (or even an MUN rep to ask) we have to assume their support.

    Bear in mind that the context of this is a Daesh attack on a UK Cabinet meeting. We can expect the level of support not just here but amongst our allies to be higher.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I have no wish to respond to an attack that did not happen and so abstain, as I have argued for the abolition of the Crisis Committee.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Neck and neck in the vote - seriously?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    This is a motion from the Government on a Declaration of War? I seriously hope that this is a free vote, and I am beginning to think that this is a motion in response to the Vote of No Confidence because it is out of character.

    It's a strong nay from me, as well as a scoff of derision at the attempt to reference Crisis 2.
    How can you attempt to suggest an all-out invasion of a country already being torn apart by civil war?
    I really don't want to rant so I'll link Tony Benn's speech.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Nay, this motion proposes the recognition of ISIS as a legitimate state

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Nay, this motion proposes the recognition of ISIS as a legitimate state

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    How? Surely you can declare war on an organisation/militant group, as Netanyahu declared war on Hamas?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    How? Surely you can declare war on an organisation/militant group, as Netanyahu declared war on Hamas?
    A declaration of war is a legal thing between states. Netanyahu war on Hamas is like the war on terror or drugs, a political statement you make for your electors

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    A declaration of war is a legal thing between states. Netanyahu war on Hamas is like the war on terror or drugs, a political statement you make for your electors

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ahh right, okay.
    Sounds good.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Ahh right, okay.
    Sounds good.
    There's a reason why most wars these days are "conflicts". Declaration of War is also, almost without exception, illegal since WWII with changes to international law, not least the UN Charter, declaring that it is illegal to use, or threaten to use, of force in international conflicts. For instance, the last formal declaration of war by the United States was against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania on 5/6/42, but since then there have been multiple military engagements authorised either by Congress or a UNSC resolution. The last formal declaration of war by the UK was on 25/1/42 against Thailand.

    As an aside, I just learnt that any debates in Parliament that have an impact on the royal prerogative requires the consent of the sitting monarch, for instance a PMB put forward under the 10 minute rule in 1999 consent was withheld, although before you republicans go nuts over it the government advised it to be withheld
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    There's a reason why most wars these days are "conflicts". Declaration of War is also, almost without exception, illegal since WWII with changes to international law, not least the UN Charter, declaring that it is illegal to use, or threaten to use, of force in international conflicts. For instance, the last formal declaration of war by the United States was against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania on 5/6/42, but since then there have been multiple military engagements authorised either by Congress or a UNSC resolution. The last formal declaration of war by the UK was on 25/1/42 against Thailand.

    As an aside, I just learnt that any debates in Parliament that have an impact on the royal prerogative requires the consent of the sitting monarch, for instance a PMB put forward under the 10 minute rule in 1999 consent was withheld, although before you republicans go nuts over it the government advised it to be withheld
    Ahh right.
    Also interesting, although your definition of republican is different from my republican. I'm republican in the Irish nationalist sense, although I sympathise with the anti-monarchy republican somewhat.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Ahh right.
    Also interesting, although your definition of republican is different from my republican. I'm republican in the Irish nationalist sense, although I sympathise with the anti-monarchy republican somewhat.
    Both lots are as bad as each other, Irish republicans are half right, there should be a united Ireland, you just get the controller wrong
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Both lots are as bad as each other, Irish republicans are half right, there should be a united Ireland, you just get the controller wrong
    haha PRSOM but don't ****ing tempt me
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    I thought all the pros and cons of each side were equal, so had to let fate decide. I abstained
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    A tough decision as both sides of the argument has good and bad sides. However for me it is an aye.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 28, 2016
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs forum guidelines

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.