hypochondriac

And what about all the other regimes who had to be met with force before negotiations could begin?

Or indeed the Italians and nazis. It was after the fighting that they were willing to discuss things. We tried the negotiation route with Hitler and all it did was give him more time to get stronger before he attacked. In many ways this situation is actually worse because IS do not have a specific aim beyond killing everyone.

They aren't ridiculing you for stating that (which is very obvious.) you leave yourself open to ridiculing by suggesting things but having no strategy or detail to back it up with.

But who is to say that you decide not to kill them and then even more come along to join them. At least in the first scenario we have less extremists.

So are you suggesting that laying down our arms and allowing Islamic state to expand will decrease the chances of last night happening? Are you suggesting that we ignore them until some indeterminate point in the future when they decide that they cannot bring down the west and want to start negotiations? Just as the last time we discussed this, you are happy to call for negotiations but when asked to elaborate you are unable to.

Hold on we are discussing how best to deal with these people. Soggy says negotiation but won't give any other details despite being invited to do so a number of times. Tell me how else we are supposed to debate like adults as you put it?

Soggy have you ever seen that Halloween Simpsons episode where they wish for world peace and then some aggressive aliens come down and enslave mankind who are powerless to fight back? Your solutions remind me of that for some reason.

Because they don't want to coexist with us, they want to murder us. It's not difficult to understand.

I note you have no answers. It's why you get the responses you do because you come out with obvious stuff like peaceful solutions are preferable (clearly) but then come up with no ideas about how that would be achieved. You suggest negotiation but give no more details than that. Is it any wonder people dismiss you arguments?

Well just for a start as verbal said the fact that a hostage tried negotiating with them and they brutally murdered and tortured him along with a number of other examples. Why are you being so idiotic by suggesting anyone said kill them all? When you say all who are you referring to?

Maybe best not to mention those certain people who you won't lower yourself to by point scoring then.

I was referring to your point about "certain parties" and "point scoring."

I love that chapel end Charlie's response about how bad taste point scoring is is in itself a form of point scoring. Be honest, your post would not exist had the conversation about homosexual footballers never happened. You're just as pompous and prepared to point score as everyone else on this message board. Maybe a bit more pompous tbh.

Supposedly we are meant to disregard what they say because eventually they will negotiate? What evidence does anyone have of this? The fact is that they won't.

You realise it was sarcasm?

People on here. An unhappy elderly gentleman for one...

Just proves that simply talking to these people is an idiotic plan. They don't negotiate.

It's OK. Some have told us all we need to do is talk to them and it will all be fine.

Was he the one who put superglue in Keith's lock and cut his phone line?

Mods can we remove this obvious troll please?

Need some more vein action imo

Got a pic of the mascot?

Does it really matter what Corbyn says and does? He has absolutely no chance of getting in power so it's largely pointless.

Well cortese certainly showed class with that newspaper article after he had gone.

You mean the half time Radio Solent branded beach ball