Cameron: IS 'have tried to attack us' - BBC News

[@agitbeats]

Q; What does Cameron and ISIS have in common? A; Both are friends of Israel.

[@maninsligo]

It is in someone's interests to 'bomb', but its definitely not in the UKs (the people) interests. It would be interesting to have David Cameron define the UK (people) and its interests (quality of life) because he's convinced himself that it is US corporate interests. There is insufficent money for benefits or university fees and grants which is creating 'carefully planned' poverty. In mathematical terms, how is it possible to fund the welfare of more imigrants brought into the country if there isn't sufficient funds to adequately feed, cloth, heat and shelter their own people?. Even to the most ignorant of voters (most) its becoming apparent that the government will never represent them or their community. Given the prevalence of food banks it would be interesting to establish the source of funds that will finance the 'bombing campaign' and why the UK (which is the people) want this instead of thriving communities. Cameron's definition for the UK and its interests 'is not the people'. Has Putin asked for David's assistance? The UK is effectively a corporate subsidiary of the US. The English/French made a deliberate decision to reduce security measures at the tunnel allowing anyone to enter illegally, so those terrorists who are here are here. It is illegal for anyone to make statements based upon race, making criticism of immigrants 'illegal' on the grounds of racism. This goes on because people simply haven't suffered enough! Post WWII, the English were gradually usurped by British Citizenship which defines British as anyone with a British passport. This is the same model of the US which is a nation of immigrants run by corporations.

[@trevortrevortsr2]

No - why start something you are not willing to finish with troops - you can't have half a war in a country that neither side want you there - sending our guys over in 30 year old aircraft is reckless - UK efforts should focus on bolstering Iraq for the influx of ISIL fleeing the carnage Russia and Iran are about to inflict on them

[@peabase]

+Trev S The Tornado is a perfectly capable strike platform. And why limit its use to Iraq? ISIS should be hit wherever and whenever.

[@trevortrevortsr2]

peabase The Iraq government such that it is, invited UK to assist clear ISIS from there land - The Assad Government has not invited UK - in other words both sides of the civil war don't want UK there - The Cameron government claim to have the support of the Free Syrian army - but they account for less than 5% - their force is fluid many going over to ISIS taking their american gifted weapons with them - its a fact that funds given to the Free Syrian Army are used to buy ISIS oil. Its relatively easy to shower bombs on impoverished peoples under the yoke of ISIS - it looks impressive watching a Brimstone missile track a speeding pick up truck - but it cost £105,000 a pop to put on that display. will only encourage more fanatics

[@peabase]

Trev S I wouldn't put much stock in the legitimacy of Assad's regime. Unleashing the hounds of hell on your people tends to erode your right to rule over them. Everyone in Syria, including Assad, has taken delivery of ISIS oil. Moreover, Assad's power plants and cell phone towers have been servicing ISIS in return. Brimstone missiles fired in Iraq cost as much as ones fired in Syria. In the latter, however, they may be more cost-effective.

[@trevortrevortsr2]

peabase Attacking Syria with a few aircraft is tokenism

[@brannigandonnybrookoire9406]

Spot on Mr. Cameron! XD

[@samkeyho4200]

What happen to Iraq?

[@southeastt5460]

First time I agree with you David

[@wtf-goingon813]

google WTC7 now

[@elizabethhunt4956]

big ups

[@phildobson8705]

Turkey pursues its own interests in the Syrian conflict and it is not cooperating with NATO or other forces in the region, a retired US Army Major General Paul Vallely said The downing of a Russian Su-24 bomber by the Turkish air force will hardly be the last act of provocation by Ankara, so NATO should kick Turkey out of the alliance, Vallely said. Read more: sputniknews.com/politics/20151128/1030893620/turkey-should-be-kicked-out-of-nato.html#ixzz3soOC3AE1

[@sharedopions8720]

more proof. then maybe people will agree for a aerial campaign at least against syria. another iraq is needed

[@sharedopions8720]

not needed