Corb Blimey!

[Errorist Sympathiser]

Corb Blimey!

Today's Guardian makes depressing reading, pushing the line that linking terrorism in our cities and the West's foreign policy is WRONG and UNHELPFUL and STOP IT.

Oh, and being uncomfortable about the police killing people is also WRONG and UNHELPFUL and STOP IT.

But Labour shadow ministers lining up to support Cameron's BOMB THEM policy is fine.

[Etienne]

Corb Blimey!

The Livingstone/James farce however does seem to be a clusterfuck that the media can't be blamed for.

[dalliance]

Corb Blimey!

I don't really get this blanket refusal by Corbyn and his acolytes to even consider police shoot to kill tactics as possibly relevant.

How can you make that statement without any broader context? The French police stormed the Bataclan where there were three terrorists holed up with hostages. There was a gun fight and all three were killed, fortunately without any of the hostages sustaining injuries.

Now that was an example of a shoot to kill policy, one dictated by extreme circumstances and one that surely no-one could argue was the only course of action available?

[Errorist Sympathiser]

Corb Blimey!

I'm not sure there is a blanket refusal, is there? I've certainly read that Corbyn admits that there are occasions when it absolutely necessary but - as the family of Jean Charles de Menezes will testify - a shoot-to-kill "policy" can go very, very wrong.

[E10 Rifle]

Corb Blimey!

Yeah, Livingstone was being an arse there. Can't really pin that on anyone else.

Re shoot to kill (an issue on which various parts of Britain have very uncomfortable and unpleasant recent experience), he's not ruling it out - he's talking about appropriate responses in different situations. So a load of gunmen going berzerk would merit one response and, say, a bloke running down a tube escalator to work might merit another.

But in the world of Grown-up Moderate Politics, everyone should simply be SHOUTING about KILLING. Glad that's cleared up.

(Still, I suspect this is all going to bode ill for the Oldham by-election - even a soft-left leader would struggle in a climate like the one we're currently in).

[Bored Of Education]

Corb Blimey!

Did they interview Ken in a pub?

dalliance, I am not sure whether you have read his full comments I posted earlier in the thread but his exact comment is

I’m not happy with a shoot-to-kill policy in general.

which he then goes on to qualify.

Personally, I think that anyone who is happy with a shoot-to-kill policy generally is probably a psychopath. Anyone should want it as a last resort and only used when absolutely necessary. So Corbyn's remarks should be eminently sensible and a considered response logical.

[Ray de Galles]

Corb Blimey!

Forgive me if this has already been covered but I was under the impression that "Shoot to kill policy" was a misnomer anyway.

Any armed force will be trained to shoot for the chest or head which will normally be fatal as attempting to only wound a suspect deemed a danger to life will potentially increase that danger.

The issue is normally how you establish if someone is a danger to life and if you have a "Shoot on sight" policy.

.

[Bored Of Education]

Corb Blimey!

Good point. I am not sure whether the question was phrased like that or whether he used the phrase. It would be interesting to find out actually.

[dalliance]

Corb Blimey!

To say you are not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general is such a disingenuous comment though. Of course there are many possible situations when a shoot to kill policy makes perfect sense and there are many others when it doesn't.

It's an incredibly complex question that requires a nuanced response and his answer fails on this count.

It's rather like his response to the drone killing of Emwazi. Now of course we'd all like to have seen him arrested and tried in a British court, but with that ideal option impossible to achieve then the route they went was just about the next best, or least worst open to them.

But Corbyn stating he was against any killings of this nature sounds little more than him mired in his ideological entrenchment. That's fine for an outsider protest MP on the fringes of the political establishment, but is it really appropriate for someone who finds himself in the senior position he occupies now?

[Bizarre Löw Triangle]

Corb Blimey!

dalliance wrote:
It's rather like his response to the drone killing of Emwazi. Now of course we'd all like to have seen him arrested and tried in a British court, but with that ideal option impossible to achieve then the route they went was just about the next best, or least worst open to them.

Extra-judicial assassination of non-military targets is illegal under international law, isn't it?

[Errorist Sympathiser]

Corb Blimey!

dalliance wrote: It's rather like his response to the drone killing of Emwazi. Now of course we'd all like to have seen him arrested and tried in a British court, but with that ideal option impossible to achieve then the route they went was just about the next best, or least worst open to them.

Was it impossible? Or just "a bit difficult"? Does chucking missiles from a drone play better than sending in search & capture troops?

[dalliance]

Corb Blimey!

I'd imagine that dropping in a snatch squad to try and capture him would be logistically incredibly challenging and open up the risk of much greater loss of life.

BLT. Would Emwazi qualify as a non-military target?

[E10 Rifle]

Corb Blimey!

Have we got confirmation of Emwazi's death yet? It all got drowned out amid the Paris stuff but I thought we were still at the "believed to have been among those killed" stage.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corb Blimey!

dalliance wrote: To say you are not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general is such a disingenuous comment though. Of course there are many possible situations when a shoot to kill policy makes perfect sense and there are many others when it doesn't.

It's an incredibly complex question that requires a nuanced response and his answer fails on this count.

It's more a non-question than a complex question, but I know what you mean.

There's no formal process to authorize "shoot to kill". Stalker was sent in to discover if there was an "unofficial" shoot to kill policy in Northern Ireland. It's a police/security forces decision and it's (supposed to be) judged by the law.

I'm surprised he didn't know this from the De Menezes case. Who did he think "authorized" it in that case? Tony Blair? Ken Livingstone? The London Assembly Police Committee?

As for what the police are supposed to do, they shoot to kill some people and don't shoot and all at others.

I could have told Corbyn that his enememies will be waiting for a "soft on terror" quote, so keep it simple. I can't see Seumas Milne lasting very long.

[Bored Of Education]

Corb Blimey!

That's something that has occurred to me. I have a mate who is a armed policeman and he doesn't get told what to do on a day to day basis by Cameron. It goes on - not exclusively with terrorism - and it isn't all centrally ordered

No E10, we haven't had that confirmation yet.

Ken's sobered up.

[Bizarre Löw Triangle]

Corb Blimey!

dalliance wrote: I'd imagine that dropping in a snatch squad to try and capture him would be logistically incredibly challenging and open up the risk of much greater loss of life.

BLT. Would Emwazi qualify as a non-military target?

IDK. But given IS aren't exactly short of executioners and he wasn't in a position of command, it's hard to argue his killing was a military goal.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corb Blimey!

I was a big fan of him as mayor, and other people have done what he did without even being asked to stand down (like Pickles), but is there a case for Livingstone standing down to make a point about mental health?

In the meantime:

@britainelects
Scottish Parliament voting intention (const.):
SNP: 50% (-5)
LAB: 20% (-)
CON: 18% (+6)
LDEM: 7% (-)

Scottish Labour separating itself off and treating England and Wales as pariahs went well then.

[E10 Rifle]

Corb Blimey!

Do you think they'd be doing better if they hadn't?

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corb Blimey!

Bizarre Löw Triangle wrote:

I'd imagine that dropping in a snatch squad to try and capture him would be logistically incredibly challenging and open up the risk of much greater loss of life.

BLT. Would Emwazi qualify as a non-military target?

IDK. But given IS aren't exactly short of executioners and he wasn't in a position of command, it's hard to argue his killing was a military goal.

Yeah, exactly. It's not nice thinking of him sitting there boasting to his mates about how much of a cunt he is, like some old villain on the Costa. But he's not exactly got much of a future.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corb Blimey!

E10 Rifle wrote: Do you think they'd be doing better if they hadn't?

Not at this stage, but it feeds into the whole "Scotland's so different" thing which is pure SNP. Decide what's devolved and what isn't, and then stick together on the UK-level stuff.

If they'd separated before, and struck a distinctive more left tone that Ed Miliband, it would have been a gift to the Tories. Not just the SNP holding weaky Ed to ransom but lefty separate Scottish Labour too.

That would assume they won some seats, of course.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corb Blimey!

In the meantime, sensible old Dave's desire of unilaterally bombing Syria isn't very popular. 18% of the public support it, per Survation.

One bellend Minister unnamed has already declared war. Wonder which former Times journalist that was.

[Bizarre Löw Triangle]

Corb Blimey!

Tubby Isaacs wrote: I was a big fan of him as mayor, and other people have done what he did without even being asked to stand down (like Pickles), but is there a case for Livingstone standing down to make a point about mental health?

There's a case*.

That said, the Labour Right instrumentalising mental health as a stick to beat Corbyn while at the same time using similar slurs to attack Corbyn is fucking appalling.

* Main reason I'd say there's a case is Corbyn's position on mental health is actually really good and dead important, and Livingstone's comments are likely to detract and derail that.

Also because using someone's actual or suggested mental health as a means to attack is fucking awful and no-one should ever do it.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corb Blimey!

Yeah, it's being cynically weaponized.

But Corbyn is excellent on mental health, as you say. And there's some cross party impetus at the moment.

Livingstone's pretty divisive anyway. Must be other people who oppose Trident who could co-chair the review.

[E10 Rifle]

Corb Blimey!

Yeah I'd ditch him on this. I mean, he's done fine and important things in his political career, but Livingstone's time has gone.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corb Blimey!

I wanted him brought back, didn't I?