So The President & Foreign Minister...
News7 mins ago
Should May Have Sought Parliamentary Approval?
She has entirely lost my support - such as it was- and will not lose any sleep over that perhaps, but there seems to be gathering condemnation at home and abroad e.g.
https:/
https:/
Answers
Yes. I don't particularly care about the legal niceties. There was no urgency required in this action (if it was due to chemical weapons) except for the American timetable, and therefore she was morally obliged to consult parliament as Cameron did. I imagine, however, that she was concerned about losing the vote and also that the US has learned from last time...
08:45 Sun 15th Apr 2018
Corbyn: //he will never be Prime minister . //
yes he will. certain labour members nominated him to create a balance. tories saw an opportunity to spike the party, joined labour and voted for a "no hoper". both misjudged. now Mr Corbyn is leader and is backed by a sinister personality cult that sweeps all dissent before it. make no mistake, mr corbyn will be prime minister.
yes he will. certain labour members nominated him to create a balance. tories saw an opportunity to spike the party, joined labour and voted for a "no hoper". both misjudged. now Mr Corbyn is leader and is backed by a sinister personality cult that sweeps all dissent before it. make no mistake, mr corbyn will be prime minister.
And now, wouldn't you guess?
https:/
https:/
Actually, it really was an unconstitutional action;
'As noted in the Cabinet Manual, the current state of play is that Parliament has been consulted on all significant military deployments since Tony Blair sought approval for the UK’s military intervention in Iraq in 2003 - setting quite a precedent in constitutional terms.
So why is the Government so keen to disown and disarm the convention now? From a constitutional perspective, it’s important to note that the the convention allows the government a great deal of flexibility, providing exemptions from parliamentary consultation for emergency situations or where the need for urgent or secret action precludes advance parliamentary consultation. Given the grim seven year history of the conflict, however, it seems difficult to argue that the action being considered is strategically urgent. Nor, in the context of Trump’s prematurely ejaculated tweets, could one argue that any deployments might be secret.'
https:/
'As noted in the Cabinet Manual, the current state of play is that Parliament has been consulted on all significant military deployments since Tony Blair sought approval for the UK’s military intervention in Iraq in 2003 - setting quite a precedent in constitutional terms.
So why is the Government so keen to disown and disarm the convention now? From a constitutional perspective, it’s important to note that the the convention allows the government a great deal of flexibility, providing exemptions from parliamentary consultation for emergency situations or where the need for urgent or secret action precludes advance parliamentary consultation. Given the grim seven year history of the conflict, however, it seems difficult to argue that the action being considered is strategically urgent. Nor, in the context of Trump’s prematurely ejaculated tweets, could one argue that any deployments might be secret.'
https:/
Nope, not even vaguely.
In this type of operation she was totally correct in going ahead.
Parliament should not be recalled every time on the whim of other parties.
It’s a different matter for a large scale boots-on-the-ground op but limited air strikes (especially where speed may be of the essence) executed in this operation should not require a debate.
In this type of operation she was totally correct in going ahead.
Parliament should not be recalled every time on the whim of other parties.
It’s a different matter for a large scale boots-on-the-ground op but limited air strikes (especially where speed may be of the essence) executed in this operation should not require a debate.
Kandro,
WW3 would have started at some time. We are not advanced enough to be an all encompassing world. Actually perhaps that's what Partic Stewart should be campaigning on. Not keep us in the EU but unite the world ala Star Trek! Where are the Aliens from planet Zog to unite the world when you need them lol
My thinking is that there will be lots of rhetoric, shouting by the shouty people, bare chests posturing. There may be more bombs and retaliation but eventually someone will come along and calm the waters a bit.
Well that's my hope at any rate (without perhaps the need for any more bombs).
WW3 would have started at some time. We are not advanced enough to be an all encompassing world. Actually perhaps that's what Partic Stewart should be campaigning on. Not keep us in the EU but unite the world ala Star Trek! Where are the Aliens from planet Zog to unite the world when you need them lol
My thinking is that there will be lots of rhetoric, shouting by the shouty people, bare chests posturing. There may be more bombs and retaliation but eventually someone will come along and calm the waters a bit.
Well that's my hope at any rate (without perhaps the need for any more bombs).
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles19 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles21 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles203 mins ago
A Clash Between Congressional Lawmakers
News268 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.