Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

The Middle East...where Are Events Taking Us?


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Here we go. Full article. That is really some rate of collapse in support.

    Quote

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/12/06/support-syria-air-strikes-falls-again/

    Support for Syria air strikes falls again

    Net support for RAF air strikes within Syria has fallen 31 points in just over one week – and now a majority of Labour voters oppose

    New YouGov research conducted from December 2-3 – partly before and partly after the December 2 vote – reveals that while public opinion is still narrowly in favour of air strikes opposition has in fact grown again.

    Support had remained roughly constant between September 16 and November 24, at between 58% and 60%, however it began to slip thereafter. At net +39 on November 24 it fell to +31 on the 27th, +17 on December 1 and to only +8 on December 3.

    #Davesiraq

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 4.4k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    There is no other description for what is happening other than war crime and genocide.   Israel is technically the occupying force on Gaza and as such is duty bound to protect civilians.   Complet

    The scenes in Gaza look like the aftermath of a nuclear bomb, utter devastation. The Israelis telling people to go back to their homes in northern Gaza as its "safe", what are they supposed to go back

    Reported on the BBC too... An air strike on an army camp has killed three soldiers, the Syrian government says, blaming the US-led coalition for the attack. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
    7 minutes ago, scottish skier said:

    Here we go. Full article. That is really some rate of collapse in support.

    #Davesiraq

     

    44 percent for bombing against 36... Yep its still ahead by 8 percent in support 

     

    p.s quote error never quoted ya in quoted quote 

    Edited by lfcdude
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
    7 minutes ago, lfcdude said:

     

    44 percent against 36... Yep its still ahead by 8 percent in support 

    Sure. However, that result is already out of date and if the rate of collapse is continuing on the same trend, it would already show more opposed than supporting by today.

    Of course we need to wait for fresh polling, but a 31 net point collapse in just a week is really something.

    Scotland is opposed to the strikes, doesn't trust the UK government to make sensible decisions on Syria nor make Scotland safe, and expects more terrorist attacks as a result of the vote. That's of primary interest to me, but I'm posting UK results for general interest.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
    On 12/4/2015, 10:36:27, Snowyowl9 said:

     

    The quote bug strikes again!:D

    Anywho, in 1940, the Luftwaffe thought that raining bombs on London, Coventry, Plymouth, Portsmouth, Bristol, Glasgow et. al., would break British spirits; likewise, in 1945, the Americans thought that blitzing Tokyo would weaken the Japanese, and we and the Americans thought that fire-bombing German cities would end the war in Europe...The Nazis' cunning plan failed completely; the raids on Tokyo needed 2 atomic bombs to obtain surrender, and the European fire-bombings would never have succeeded but for ground troops...

    So, IMO, there is some historical justification for believing airstrikes alone will be ineffective, is there not?

    Edited by Ed Stone
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
    6 minutes ago, scottish skier said:

    Sure. However, that result is already out of date and if the rate of collapse continued, it could already show more opposed than supporting by today.

    Of course we need to wait for fresh polling, but a 31 point collapse in just a week is really something.

    Scotland is opposed to the strikes, doesn't trust the UK government to make sensible decisions on Syria nor make Scotland safe, and expects more terrorist attacks as a result of the vote. That's of primary interest to me, but I'm posting UK results for general interest.

     

    I am not sure how polls work.. But could be ringing people in areas against more 

     

    Quote

    So, IMO, there is some historical justification for believing airstrikes will be ineffective, is there not?

    Again poor description.. If the Nazies bombed r airfields radar the war would be lost that is a fact but aimed at population.. alowing the battle of Britain to commence  Where if we stick to ISIS oil fields and their money and strategic positions it could work 

    Edited by lfcdude
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
    14 minutes ago, lfcdude said:

    I am not sure how polls work.. But could be ringing people in areas against more 

    Yougov is an online panel poll, so that' can't happen.

    Polls are of course demographically weighted which irons out any variations that might occur such as more anti-strike Labour voters choosing to complete the poll.

    However they are not infallible, and another pollster using another method might find something different.

    Even if absolute numbers are off, the trend is quite quite something and it shouldn't be affected by absolute errors.

    We'll need to wait for other polls to see if the trend continues. And, ideally, results for the same question from other pollsters using different methods.

    What should be noted is the public were opposed previously, earlier in the year. What may be happening is that support that appeared subsequently was weak, and this is now collapsing as a result; people now thinking hard about what another gung-ho middle eastern oil/gas war with no plan means.

    I'm sure we'll get new polls soon enough as it's a controversial hot topic!

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: The Garden of England
  • Weather Preferences: A large kack of heavy cloud
  • Location: The Garden of England
    10 minutes ago, scottish skier said:

    Sure. However, that result is already out of date and if the rate of collapse is continuing on the same trend, it would already show more opposed than supporting by today.

    Of course we need to wait for fresh polling, but a 31 net point collapse in just a week is really something.

    Scotland is opposed to the strikes, doesn't trust the UK government to make sensible decisions on Syria nor make Scotland safe, and expects more terrorist attacks as a result of the vote. That's of primary interest to me, but I'm posting UK results for general interest.

    Its inevitable that such a loaded question will give negative responses. I expect most respondent's opinion has gone from ignorant indifference to repeating a line they've seen on the news in the last week.

    I don't take any notice of any polls any more. They are often appallingly inaccurate. May 2015 GE, 2014 Scottish Indy...

    Calls today for JC to distance himself from the 'Stop the War' coalition. He won't of course. Keep digging Jezza...

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
    16 minutes ago, lfcdude said:

     

    Again poor description.. If the Nazies bombed r airfields radar the war would be lost that is a fact but aimed at population.. alowing the battle of Britain to commence  Where if we stick to ISIS oil fields and their money and strategic positions it could work 

    Well, someone needs to let all the hospital workers and wedding party-goers (I mean 'collateral damage') that, then?

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
    5 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

    Well, someone needs to let all the hospital workers and wedding party-goers (I mean 'collateral damage') that, then?

     

    Thats nice.. but were targeting ISIS people not human populations that the nazies was 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
    5 minutes ago, Dougal said:

    They are often appallingly inaccurate. May 2015 GE, 2014 Scottish Indy...

    The question is not leading in any way; simply:

    Would you approve or disapprove of the RAF taking part in air strike operations against Islamic State/ISIS in Syria?

    The polls for the GE were within standard margin of error, so they were not out. They were at the higher end of the error though, and FPTP played a big role in the 'surprise'.

    In Scotland they were absolutely bang on, and predicted vote shares within 1%.

    In the independence referendum they were likewise almost bang on; again only deviated on average within standard margin of error. Even picked up the last minute swing towards No on the back of the 'Vow' etc.

    However, we only have results from one pollster. More polls are needed and from different pollsters.

    All we have right now is quite a strong suggestion that support for air strikes is potentially plummeting.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire
  • Weather Preferences: Winter: Cold & Snowy, Summer: Just not hot
  • Location: Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire

    Saying that opinion polls are "often" appallingly inaccurate is an exaggeration.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
    5 minutes ago, lfcdude said:

     

    Thats nice.. but were targeting ISIS people not human populations that the nazies was 

    And creating a near infinite pool of would-be Islamist martyrs while we're at it!

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: The Garden of England
  • Weather Preferences: A large kack of heavy cloud
  • Location: The Garden of England
    2 minutes ago, scottish skier said:

    The question is not leading in any way; simply:

    Would you approve or disapprove of the RAF taking part in air strike operations against Islamic State/ISIS in Syria?

    The polls for the GE were within standard margin of error, so they were not out. They were at the higher end of the error though, and FPTP played a big role in the 'surprise'.

    In Scotland they were absolutely bang on, and predicted vote shares within 1%.

    In the independence referendum they were likewise almost bang on; again only deviated on average within standard margin of error.

    However, we only have results from one pollster. More polls are needed and from different pollsters.

    All we have right now is quite a strong suggestion that support for air strikes is potentially plummeting.

    I really wouldn't give the average pollster that much credit. Sorry to sound a bit elitist, but most people just regurgitate whatever doomladen message they see on the news.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Burton-on-Trent
  • Location: Burton-on-Trent

    Assad interview with the Sunday Times

     

    http://sana.sy/en/?p=63558

     

    Never knew the Kurds and Assad were allies, another factoid the Western Media forgot to tell us I guess. There is very clearly a will by the majority of Syrians, the Syrian regime and the Kurds for the country to have a future, and a will from ISIS, Al-Nusra, FSA etc. for the country to be in perpetual chaos.

    Edited by Snowy L
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
    3 minutes ago, Dougal said:

    I really wouldn't give the average pollster that much credit. Sorry to sound a bit elitist, but most people just regurgitate whatever doomladen message they see on the news.

    I think there is some truth to that, at least for the apathetic / 'I've always voted this way so always will' group.

    However, the SNP would not be in government in Scotland / have wiped the floor with Labour in the GE if people went by what they read in the papers / saw on the news. We still don't even have a single paper which is pro-SNP. Scotland is served a daily diet of 'SNP = bad' yet the population makes their own minds up.

    My belief is that the electorate are in the main not fools and shouldn't be treated as such. Do that and they'll kick you in the erse; something Lab/Con/Lib have learned in Scotland.

    However, as I said, the Yougov results are just the findings of one pollster. Only time will tell on public opinion on the matter.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: St rads Dover
  • Weather Preferences: Snow, T Storms.
  • Location: St rads Dover
    46 minutes ago, Dougal said:

    I really wouldn't give the average pollster that much credit. Sorry to sound a bit elitist, but most people just regurgitate whatever doomladen message they see on the news.

    Well if that's the case support would be growing and quite fast too, as the news is very pro bombing. 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
    48 minutes ago, Dougal said:

    I really wouldn't give the average pollster that much credit. Sorry to sound a bit elitist, but most people just regurgitate whatever doomladen message they see on the news.

    Hence we all have to put up with selective Austerity?:D

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol

    SS - you're the undisputed 'king' of Poll Quoting on NW, for sure.

    Bombing alone wont solve but it will probably disrupt ISIS on the ground. SAS already in and around their territory in Syria and Iraq, i suspect, along with other special forces.

    Of course ISIS operatives already in UK and other countries - our intelligence services and Police will already be on to many of them but a few will get through the net.

    Different times ahead...for all of us.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Powys Mid Wales borders.
  • Location: Powys Mid Wales borders.

    You have to get to the root cause of this and the UK are not doing anything not even touching the surface as they are suppling arms to countries like Saudi Arabia/Israel.

    Era of ignoring Saudi terror sponsorship over: Germany.

    Germany says it will no more ‘look the other way’ as Saudi Arabia continues to nurture terrorism throughout the world.

    “We must make it clear to the Saudis that the time of looking the other way is over,” German Vice Chancellor and Minister for Economic Affairs Sigmar Gabriel said on Sunday, referring to the Western policy of turning a blind eye on Saudi ties to extremist groups worldwide.

    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/12/06/440551/Germany-Saudi-Arabia-Daesh-Wahhabism-Sigmar-Gabriel

    Comment.

    Finally, someone has spoken. What took him that long.

     

     

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: The Garden of England
  • Weather Preferences: A large kack of heavy cloud
  • Location: The Garden of England
    13 hours ago, alexisj9 said:

    Well if that's the case support would be growing and quite fast too, as the news is very pro bombing. 

    Pro bombing for the rolling news potential yes. But also heavily laden with a 'there are bound to be serious consequences on our streets' subtext too. 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
  • Weather Preferences: Cold and snowy or warm and dry
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
    16 minutes ago, Snowy L said:

    US Airstikes help ISIS

     

    http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/reports-isis-attacks-ayash-base-following-us-led-airstrikes/

     

    USA/Saudi/Turkey don't want this war to end.

    Reported on the BBC too...

    An air strike on an army camp has killed three soldiers, the Syrian government says, blaming the US-led coalition for the attack.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35024408

     

    Alongside this other story...

    Iraq has threatened to go to the UN if Turkey does not withdraw soldiers it sent to areas near the northern Iraqi city of Mosul within 48 hours.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35023249

     

    Nobody seems to know who's on their side and who is the 'enemy' in that region at the moment.

    • Like 7
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.
  • Weather Preferences: very cold frosty days, blizzards, very hot weather, floods, storms
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.

    Turkey summons Russian ambassador over missile launcher

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35028798?ocid=socialflow_twitter

    Turkey has summoned the Russian ambassador after a serviceman on a Russian naval ship allegedly brandished a rocket launcher while the vessel passed through Istanbul at the weekend.

    Images published in Turkish media appeared to show the Russian on deck, resting the launcher on his shoulder.

    Relations between the two countries have deteriorated sharply since Turkey last month shot down a Russian fighter jet, which it said was in its airspace.

    The Russian jet pilot was killed.

    This photo shared by photographer Emre Dağdeviren  on his Twitter account shows Russian soldiers on board the 'Caesar Kunikov.'

    Scary times... :(

    Edited by pip22
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
  • Weather Preferences: Any Extreme
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield

    Well we've got Turkey going rogue and land grabbing while it can. Confused none policy from the west. EU suddenly trying to state a policy. A fantastic mess all because Assad signed the wrong deal and we made a mess of Iraq.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    From the London School of Economics.

    Quote

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2015/12/05/if-bombing-the-middle-east-was-the-way-to-peace-it-would-be-the-most-peaceful-place-on-earth/

    If bombing the Middle East was the way to peace, it would be the most peaceful place on Earth

    On Wednesday 2 December, British MPs voted to deploy bomb attacks against ISIS/Daesh strongholds in Syria, in response to their attack on Paris earlier this month. Here, Sean Swan argues that this is misguided; despite the understandable yearning to be seen to ‘do something’, the Middle East has been bombed by the West before without achieving the desired results, and there is nothing to suggest this time would be different.

    This week, Prime Minister David Cameron pushed for the UK to bomb ISIS in Syria. The trouble is it will not work. Firstly, there are no targets. The only significant ISIS infrastructure, the oil storage facilities and refineries, have already been destroyed by the Russians. ISIS forces themselves are invisible. As one uniquely informed observer, Jürgen Todenhöfet put it “Isis fighters only march in tight orderly lines or drive in convoys in their propaganda videos. Off camera, they avoid hanging around in large groups and spend their time among the local population, preferably in apartment blocks that house families. That’s the very first chapter in the dummies’ guide to terrorism”. So there are no good targets, just the possibility of killing civilians or of ISIS capturing a downed RAF pilot and burning him to death as they did previously with a Jordanian pilot. Equally, bombing ISIS will unquestioningly have the immediate effect of making a Paris style attack in Britain more likely. These are the truly bleak scenarios that must be considered. And their potentially serious impact on community relations in Britain itself must also be borne in mind...

     

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 4
    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...