Lessons will not be learnt/learned *
 

Cameron warns of possible IS threat to UK

We're in this mess because we so called 'went after the terrorists' last time.

FFS can someone not tell him that this approach does not work!!!!

* Title edits: delete which ever one you think is wrong :D

Give them no reason to be a threat and they won't be, start fcuking around with them and they will be. We should already know this.

This is another reason I'll be going with a Yes vote, hopefully our lot won't go sticking their noses into other's countries affairs.

Sounds like a yes from me too

Sounds like appeasement to me, history is littered with failed attempts at this approach.

Whilst I agree somewhat with your sentiments, isn't it that some of these so called Jihadists (IS in particular) just want the world to be an Islamic state ruled by Sharia.

Whether any country has given them a reason or not they still want to take over?

Whilst I'm anti religion / anti war, I really think they need to be stopped.

I think there is some truth in this. We never invaded Egypt, yet look at the mess there. Hamas has grown on it's own. Syria has developed without any interference.

It's a threat/war against humanity,one religion to rule all.
And any of the 400 who are leaving the UK to go and take sides and are identified,shouldn't be allowed to return to the country,passports gone and family deported.
It's about time the politicians stopped arsing around with the softly approach and being all PC,human rights,started putting some stick about..

Learnt

You know what.... I wrestled with that very dilemma when writing it in the early hours, but couldn't decide which was right.

In the cold light of day I think you are right as it is like the verb to dream, learnt is the past tense and learned the past participle.

Off to change it. :thumb:

How did you manage that

You must be in with the management :Suspiciou

Edit the post and click the Go advanced button then you can change the title.:thumb:

Still not 100% sure on the learnt/learned thing as I think American English may also be involved somewhere. Will be interesting to see it written in the press and see what they use, not that that is any barometer of grammar these days of course.

I'm applying to become Scottish so I can vote Yes... that should be the Yes vote's biggest campaign point. A giant picture of Cameron and Osborne and the caption "Vote Yes to get rid of these two from your lives, neither of whom appear to know where Scotland is" :thumb:

Nope, you have these exactly back to front. A past participle is the component of a verb that might be used in the form "he has <verb(ed)>", or as is in your title, "it will be <verb(ed)>". A straight past tense would be "he <verb(ed)>". A nice unambiguous example is the verb "to do", where the past tense and past participle are completely and obviously different ("they did", "it will be done").

Here endeth the lesson :notworthy:lol1:


ps
I'm also in the IS must be stopped camp.

Yeah I just took a straw poll on historical media articles and they are about 75/25 leaning towards lessons will be learned

Thinking of dream which is a similar verb.

Past tense

Last week dreamt I was in space.

vs.

Past participle

I have often dreamed of being a racing car driver.

The question is which is in use in the title... and I think it probably should be lessons will be learned as we are in the present or even future tense.

Anyway have edited for both parties :D

Back to the subject matter. I think we all agree that IS must be stopped. The issue is how. Remember how at one time it was Saddam must be stopped. Well this is happening now because we had no credible plan as to what would happen after Saddam was removed militarily from power hence the current situation.

The steaming in with troops, planes and tanks approach may tickle Cameron's fancy, but I think a much more cohesive and united approach needs to be undertaken by a large number of nations and not just the US and UK as usual. The UN needs to play its part properly for once too and not just stand on the sidelines bleating about how awful it all is like they are doing now.

Pretty much agree with this.

I don't think the West (ok, UK and US) will ever learn (see what I did there? ;)). UN has to take the lead, but of course it will not :Whatever_:Whatever_

Agreed, any action taken against IS has to be by a broad multinational group I.e. the UN. It can't simply be the UK/US going after them because we don't like the way things panned out.

Still wrong :)
Correct explanation here, but if you're a purist (or a non-native student of the language who wants to know how to speak and write it properly :D), this should tell you all you need to know:
http://www.e-anglais.com/ressources/to_dream.php

+1. This should be a no-brainer, as neither Russia or China could stand up and say they have any support for IS's principles or world-view. Getting them to admit it though might be a different story.

So you are saying they are the same, just different? That's what your lnk seems to imply.

Just asking btw as I am genuinely interested. Unlike most on the net I do try with spelling, grammar and punctuation and always happy to learn something.

And what about sorting out the Islamist nutters at home? What do you propose for them? And these... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...rotesters.html

Well this has been an interesting little tangent. :thumb:

We are talking about mass genocide here. The innocent slaughter of men, women and children. There's a photo going around social media of a decapitated 3 year old girl at the hands of an ISIS fanatic. They are not interested in talking, they are barbaric and see human life as very cheap.

If not military force, then what? Diplomacy? With religious nutters that hack of the heads of children? Sorry, but bombs and bullets are the only way. Imagine that was your own 3yr old daughter, mother, father, brother? Sanction them or eradicate them? This is very different to the original wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Saddam never went around hacking the heads off children and nor did the Taliban, this is ten steps beyond that.

As for Scottish independence, bookies odds of 1/8 for a No and 9/2 for a Yes pretty much means its dead in the water. Scots don't want a breakaway

You're making a fairly big assumption that this photo is real...

I think the West would still be considered a threat, even if we did nothing as demonstrated on September 11 2001. However, you give them an inch, they would take a mile.

On Scotland, I don't think the iScots could, even if they wanted to. It's been suggested that if Alex Salmond doesn't take his share of the national debt, then he iScotland doesn't get to keep the military assets of the Army and Navy, no guns, tanks, fighter jets and ships since the spend on this is part of the debt. iScotland's armed forces would essentially start from scratch or use old and out of date military equipment.

Going back to this fascinating little tangent, I'm saying one is correct British English and the other is a ghastly Americanism, which should be studiously avoided unless you have the excuse of being unfortunate enough to have grown up and learnt your English there ;)

learned :thumb:

Just kidding :lol1:

Staying with the theme, when did it become acceptable to substitute certain punctuation marks with emojis? :wonder:

Stylistic license. I find graphical emotes just don't have the same visual impact when immediately preceded by a full-stop.

:D

Agreed :thumb: