45 thoughts on “De Sunday Papers

  1. Tom Duffy

    if ISIS said they are retaliating for drone attacks in Afghanistan that resulted in weddings being bombed and newly weds and children’s limbs been blown apart and so on, then you’d say fair enough, we are involved in this…but they have a problem with our life style so fu(k them to nothing…but still no more drones, we have evolved to be compassionate….

    1. Sam

      Weddings being bombed and the like doesn’t get anything like that coverage if it’s just folks from the Middle East and Asia Minor and no westerners involved.
      Compare the massive coverage given to attacking one wing of a hospital run by Médecins Sans Frontières, with the sparse mention of when the US Air Force twice bombed the Central Medical Clinic in Fallujah.
      So, if ISIS did claim they acted in revenge for that, most of us would say ‘what are they talking about? I didn’t see anything on telly about that’, and that’s only after condemning them for attacking civilians who weren’t involved in bombing the middle east.

  2. badatmemes

    If you have a TV you cannot pretend to be surprised at any ‘Britain prepares for war’ headline.
    They’ve been advertising ‘careers’ in the army for a couple of months now.
    It couldn’t be more obvious.

    A more cynical person might allude to it being a desperate ploy of an unpopular government.

    Not me.
    I would never do that.

    1. Oh Dear

      Yeah. They totally shot up France to make the army a more attractive career.

      You’re a moron even when you’re not drinking.

      1. Ms Piggy

        it is a bizarre headline though – I actually laughed (bleakly) when I saw it. Britain has been in a continuous war/s for well over a decade, they must scarcely be able to remember what it’s like not to be at war these days.

      2. Sam

        Looks to me like (s)he was commenting about the UK using it as a recruiting opportunity, a popularity ploy, /useful distraction and an excuse to spend more of their defence budget – despite the atrocities happening in France, which is more than capable of launching its own air raids. Did I miss the bit where (s)he suggested the UK actually caused it?

  3. Kieran NYC

    FG at 31% in the polls. OMG a third of the population must be shills! CLEARLY it’s DOB spending all his money to get people to vote for murderers, uncaring devils and people who kick the homeless in the face…

    According to Broadsheet posters and commentators anyway.

      1. Kieran NYC

        I think the SDs are fantastic. They need more candidates with the same conviction and authority.

        But unfortunately I don’t worship at the alter of PEACEFUL PROTEST! PEACEFUL PROTEST! Paul Murphy.

        1. Linbinius

          SD are still gonna get 6-8 i would guess. Plenty for now. They are putting most of their time into colleges and carefully developing policy with them in mind.

          1. Peter Dempsey

            Why don’t all parties run enough candidates to win a majority? (84 seats). Like Fianna Fail and Fine Gael do. Otherwise they’re beaten before they start.

          2. Linbinius

            There are plenty of reasons but a main one for SD is they don’t have that kind of support. Not yet.

            I don’t think they are playing this as a quick power grab (Renua). I also don’t think the way things are that any combination for a coalition would benefit them which they are aware of.

            Major player in 10 years. 5 if FG/FF are forced to do the duurrttyy in the GE. Just my opinion and i hope I am right. Only party I have the slightest interest in or respect for at the moment.

          3. Major Thrill

            I doubt the SDs have the mechanisms in place to properly vet that number of candidates and help them co-ordinate their campaigns – that’s a mammoth effort. If they wanted to run that many candidates they’d doubtlessly end up with a party of “independent” FF/FG/Lab and similarly opportunistic types.

  4. Charger Salmons

    I like a good war.
    It’s time all of Europe got together to bomb the bejaysus out of these crazies and we should be thinking about sending the full might of Ireland’s military strength to support our Europeaan allies.
    Oh,hang on a minute, scrap that and let’s just go for a few scoops while we rely on other people to protect us because that’s what we always do.

    1. Linbinius

      ” while we rely on other people to protect us because that’s what we always do.”

      This been the most dangerous and knee-jerk reaction i have read and heard from people after the Paris attacks. Seeing as you are mad for war would you serve? You know you can enlist in the British army, right?

    2. Sam

      The main thing protecting us has been that we didn’t bomb thousands of innocent civilians, leading to a lot of their relatives being very angry at us. (although with the continued use of Shannon for refuelling the US military, we are getting some of the anger directed at us)

      And who has protected us exactly? The only foreign power to ever gun down unarmed people on the streets here is the NATO member next door, who, almost certainly had a hand in setting off car bombs in Dublin and Monaghan.
      You can rightly condemn all the atrocities against innocent people committed by small groups of Islamic extremists, but that list is more than matched by the long list of atrocities and innocent victims of NATO powers. Bombing hospitals, blowing up 400 people in a civilian air raid shelter, and blowing an airliner with 290 innocent people on board out of the sky does not protect anyone. It just makes the world more dangerous.
      Let’s not pretend that by joining NATO we’d be fighting terrorists rather than supporting them.
      The ‘Victor’ comic level of analysis is quite tedious.

        1. Sam

          Well, the crew of the Vincennes got medals, but yes, it’s apparently rude to mention it in ‘polite company’ . Blowing 290 innocent people out of the sky with heat seeking missiles is only terrorism when someone outside of NATO does it, apparently.

      1. Charger Salmons

        The Paddies were too busy killing each other to worry about killing other people.
        Besides,the Fighting Irish is a myth.
        The Let’s Get Pissed And Watch The Premier League Irish is more like it.
        The only reason ISIS would never try to take over Ireland is they’ve already got thousands of square miles of nothing except a few ignorant peasants.
        Nope,it’ll be a coalition of our friends on the mainland,France,Russia and the US who’ll do our dirty work for us – again.

        1. Sam

          The fighting Irish refers to Irish fighting in other people’s armies actually. But by all means continue in your contradictory gibberish – the Irish don’t fight, but we somehow kill each other… was the civil war conducted mainly through slipping polonium in the enemy’s tea?

          Yes, you’re right about one thing – the US, UK, and others do a lot of dirty work.

          I, for one, am glad that people in Iraq couldn’t blame us for the half a million Iraqi kids who died under the sanctions, nor the huge increase in childhood cancers in Southern Iraq after the 1991 war, nor blowing 290 innocent civilians out of the sky and a whole host of other things, which any sensible people would rather not be associated with.
          Not to easy now to distance ourselves from the deaths of large numbers of innocent civilians, unfortunately.

          1. Sam

            I’d put that down to poor punctuation, but given the incoherence of some of the statements, the grasp of geography might be tenuous as well.

            I note (s)he didn’t expand on what ‘dirty work’ the Brits, US, French and Russians had done for us before.

            Putting Saddam in power, and arming him?
            Putting the dictator Shah Pahlavi in power in Iran after overthrowing the democratically elected government of Mosaddegh?
            Financing the Nazi party and investing heavily in union-busting Nazi Germany in the run up to WW2?
            Bombing a Greenpeace Ship in a New Zealand Harbour?
            The Russians…? It was the Red Army that lost the most men fighting the Russians, but we don’t owe any allegiance to Putin off the back of that, do we?
            They haven’t done too much for us other than supply gas via Gazprom (which has a tendency to switch off gas in winter during disputes).

            I wonder what wonderful and detailed talking points (s)he will come up with next.

      1. Anne

        That she thinks you need to pay for. ha. I don’t think so.
        Much wants more.

        You couldn’t go bang out a few choons and go and tour and work for your money, no, you need to milk it for every penny..sit on your fanny and let the money roll in.

  5. Snickers

    Isil is succeeding because it’s good at propaganda – at persuading people that their culture is superior, and is endangered by the evil west.

    Rather than putting their energy towards powerful anti-propaganda, western politicians are saying “We’re at war, let’s bomb them into utter destruction” – which will be even greater propaganda for Isil.

      1. jungleman

        It makes so much more sense to have these kind of programmes than to declare war on Isis which amounts to an acknowledgment of its statehood in the eyes of its supporters and potential supporters.

        Endorsing a sharia council directly counters the propaganda used by Isis to recruit, i.e. that western society and culture is incompatible with Islam.

        1. Twunt

          Sharia law undermines the law of the land. You cannot have a kangaroo court challenging the legitimacy of judiciary.

          1. Sam

            The second line of the article :
            The sharia council would only be able to deal with Islamic divorce, and would have no legal standing.

            So, it’s just a religious ruling, not a legal one.

          2. Sam

            Not really. From a religious point of view, Muslims can have multiple wives even though the country they live in only legally recognises one wife. Added to this, while the man can divorce his wife pretty much at will, the women have to go through a much longer process.

            It’s a bit like how the Catholic Church can hold court over whether you are allowed to get married (or remarried) in a Catholic Church.
            It has no legal effect on whether you can actually remarry, just whether it’s recognised by the church you wish to recognise it.

            There’s no way that Sharia Law would be binding in Ireland for any legal matters where Irish law exists to the contrary.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link
Broadsheet.ie