Conscientious objection isn't a legitimate posture...

Probably that analogy isn't relevant these days, when I was at school of course it was, and there were times when you simply had to stand up for yourself and make it clear that you were not prepared to be pushed about. Could be a hard lesson, but it worked, and I suppose this is what Putin is doing! as he has no restraints, and if was an Islamist bomb on that plane?! heaven only knows what his reaction will be. All I can say is, those poor poor people, as their plight is truly dreadful. If this turns out to be the case any peaceful intentions by Jeremy Corbin or anyone else I would think will be dead in the water.
This is only what I think of course.

If it were possible only to annihalate the IS leaders then a bombing campaign (with the backing of the UN) might possibly have a justification. We cannot do that. There is no certainty; and intelligence is a flawed thing and cannot be relied upon.

How to rid the world of IS is the basic question and it is incomprehensibly complicated. We do not want to kill people who are innocent (and indeed are themselves victims of this mess); we do not want to create martyrs and fan the flames of further recruitment to the "cause" and the emergence of new factions; we do not want to intervene but leave the tribal mayhem for others to mop up.

If you smack a playground bully back, you know you are hitting the right person; you know that the structural back-up of the school is there to support the ending of the bullying; you know that underneath there is a set of school rules that outlaws bullying. I do not think the analogy works.

YesNellie that is what Corbyn is arguing

I don't know whether God/the devil exists or not, none of us can know that for certain till we die. I do think that sadly there are unadulterated evil people in this world, always have been and always will be, and as in the case of the Nazis, at the end of the day, having tried peaceful means which let's face it, those monsters laughed at, they had to be faced up to and annihilated. Dealing with IS is imo exactly the same. How on earth else do you neutralise them? Like the blackmailer, or the bully in the playground, you can placate them for a while, giving more and more as for certain their demands won't end there, until there comes a day when you have no more to give and you've just got to smack them back. I'm not sure that there is much point joining in the bombing of IS in Syria, as the Russians no doubt will do it for us. I do think that we do need to have a firm voice when(?!!) this dreadful carnage is finally brought to a halt, and the future of Syria is somehow decided.

Yes but you went on to suggest I saw ISIS as children

If you could visit Hitler's bunker, would that make him any less of an evil, murdering villain? Sadly, we are not being fed any lies about ISIS.

I was thinking about past wars and the publicity/propaganda we have been fed about different factions over the years. I remember when the Viet-Cong were the evil, murdering villains. Now it is IS. It is now possible to take tours of the underground tunnels where the Viet Cong lived. In 40 years time will they be visiting IS sites?

So,what then are you on about?

whitewave it is there in your post.You ask soon if God encourages the killings of children.

We ( Britain) probably don't need to do much at this stage, but America, although it will hate it, will either have to pull out of bombings or work with Russia.

rose no-one is seeing them as children, that is a deliberate misreading.

Stop thinking of ISIS as children! They may well attract teenagers to their cause, and those teenagers may well enjoy beheadings and torture and other killings.It is a terrible organisation akin or even worse than the Taleban and needs putting a stop to, and as quickly as possible.One poster said earlier that doing something could have unforseen consequences for the future, yes, and so could dithering about doing nothing! Putin has seized the day, and the only thing the West can do now is lend assistance ( if they do anything) as Putin and Iran will mop up any resistance to Assad, and then hopefully finish off ISIS in Syria.Of course there are now other countries that ISIS has wormed it's way into, but that's another story.

whitewave. IS seems to be a different kettle of fish to other "wars". I think they will end up killing each other, or the russians will give them a hand.

No of course God does not encourage the killing of children. But pretty sure there are examples in the Bible, which others can look up.

I dont have to defend God. He can do that all by himself.

Whatever you dont like about him, is not to do with me. That is the individual's very big problem.

I will start a thread sometime about how God dealt with war in the Bible. As there seems to be huge misconceptions.

We need to stop selling weapons to anyone

Yes, that will work. Everyone will stop doing that and all at the same time, because dj thinks so. And says so.

And does your God soon encourage the killing of children?

What do you think of the acceptance of the majority of the house that there should be no bombing?

Just loving my neighbour soon. I am not so quick to condemn - whilst also recognising the need to defend oneself when under attack. This need should be tempered with humanity and a civilised planned approach where possible. I do not start from the idea that people can be intrinsically evil - misguided, cruel and flawed maybe; but they cannot be separated from the rest of humanity and regarded as expendable.

From the Foreign Affairs Committee :

"...... we believe that there should be no extension of British military action into Syria unless there is a coherent international strategy that has a realistic chance of defeating ISIL and of ending the civil war in Syria.

"In the absence of such a strategy, taking action to meet the desire to do something is still incoherent."

The committee outlined a series of points that should be explained before the government asks MPs to back its case.

International solution

These include how the action would improve the chances of success against IS, how it would contribute to a transition plan for Syria, and whether the UK has the backing of "key regional players" Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

The MPs also want to know which ground forces would take control of land captured from IS.

Committee chairman Crispin Blunt said: "By becoming a full combatant in the US-led campaign at this stage, the UK risks needlessly compromising its independent diplomatic ability to support an international political solution to the crisis."

Sounds as though this is the voice of sanity and civilised behaviour - I endorse all the above points. I prefer the idea of a measured and intelligent approach, and this seems to be the direction in which the committee is heading.

God has his limits and rightly so.
You dont seem to have them.

Your post is hugely muddled.

a mafia boss can be a loving father to his children.
True. And we dont know why he got to what he is doing.
But we let him merrily carry out doing what he is doing to others? Really? We let him carry on murdering, or getting others to do it? Raping? Kidnapping? Extortion and on and on?

How many years do we let him or her do that? Before we act?

"Why people have such a high opinion of all people is beyond me."

To me there is something precious about every human being however flawed and misguided. I guess if you subscribe to the idea of the devil then it is easy to categorise others as evil without asking what has driven them in this direction or recognising that they are your fellows.

If we divide the world into intrinsically evil or good people then it is easy to countenance slaughter. But it is a continuum - a mafia boss can be a loving father to his children.

We do have to recognise that these terrorists are behaving in an irrational and evil fashion - but some of them are little more than children and have been indoctrinated. We need to look for a civilised solution, with killing s a last resort.

I had thought that this was the Christian stance.

One main difference is the long range weapons we have now, and communications. However, we are supposed to be more civilised. Killing people without knowing you've done it does not seem very civilised to me

Why people have such a high opinion of all people is beyond me. A cursory read of any newspaper of any country should be enough to dispel that notion.

Yes I did need to look up the exact definition of co. Always a good idea when a thread goes on for a bit.

In my opinion, they have left Syria rather than stay, because they dont have backup of any kind. No one from outside is helping them.

Corbyn's principles have held the day and there will be no vote to bomb Syria. Corbyn's argument is accepted by both Labour mps as well as some Tories, Cameron has been forced to drop the vote.

Did you really have to look up the definition of conscientious objector?
How do you know how many of them do not want to kill their fellow Syrians on moral or religious grounds?
I admit I do not know, but at least I give them the benefit of the doubt.

The British went through all this in the Middle Ages, with catholics against protestants, etc. I am sure there were many people here who just wanted to live in peace with their neighbours, but were not allowed to.

One main difference is the long range weapons we have now, and communications. However, we are supposed to be more civilised. Killing people without knowing you've done it does not seem very civilised to me.

Handy reason to give though, and one which can't easily be disproved. Plus, there's the cachet element.

Having looked up the definition of co, I dont think those fleeing Syria fit the bill.

And dangerous to obtain.