Jeremy Corbyn & the IRA

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Thu Jun 15, 2017 10:18 pm

Greenmile wrote:What do you make of the following?

Flattered that I am, I simply don't have enough time to freely give you any opinions that you wish to elicit. Sorry.

ClaretRock · Post by **ClaretRock** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:08 am

I'm just happy that Corbyn didn't win! He is a snake. Love all his followers signing petitions on FB for May to resign

. Think he is the only labour leader to be defeated and instead of resigning himself tells the winning opposition they should resign. What a weapon....

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:25 am

ClaretRock wrote:I'm just happy that Corbyn didn't win! He is a snake. Love all his followers signing petitions on FB for May to resign . Think he is the only labour leader to be defeated and instead of resigning himself tells the winning opposition they should resign. What a weapon....

The Conservatives didn't win either.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:49 am

Rowls wrote:Flattered that I am, I simply don't have enough time to freely give you any opinions that you wish to elicit. Sorry.

Yep, I'm sure you're really busy. Those made-up stag-dos won't organise themselves, will they?

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:18 am

252..looks like you don't know much about Politics.

You must be well proud of your 'leader' in recent times...she goes missing at every opportunity.

- she refused to meet the public on any sort of random unplanned walkabout in the Election campaign, in case Mrs Smith from Cleckheaton asked her a tricky question.

- she refused to debate Jeremy Corbyn in the election campaign at every opportunity...scared of him.

- yesterday in North Kensington she did not meet any members of the public affected by the shocking fire in the tower block..she was keen to avoid them as usual...[any smokescreens about security issues are just that].

Yeah great leadership all round...What an appointment, next to useless.

She is pretty much the opposite of 'strong and stable' - everyone can see that now.

She is gone soon..don't know when...this is not the right time - the Tories won't want a leadership contest, or, God forbid, another election.

At some point we may well get that complete Goon Boris in charge..last seen hanging in the air on some zip-wire contraption, and regularly seen on photos of Bullingdon Club members.

jlup1980 · Post by **jlup1980** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:30 am

She's living on borrowed time that's for sure.

ClaretRock · Post by **ClaretRock** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:38 pm

hampsteadclaret wrote:252..looks like you don't know much about Politics.

You must be well proud of your 'leader' in recent times...she goes missing at every opportunity.

- she refused to meet the public on any sort of random unplanned walkabout in the Election campaign, in case Mrs Smith from Cleckheaton asked her a tricky question.

- she refused to debate Jeremy Corbyn in the election campaign at every opportunity...scared of him.

- yesterday in North Kensington she did not meet any members of the public affected by the shocking fire in the tower block..she was keen to avoid them as usual...[any smokescreens about security issues are just that].

Yeah great leadership all round...What an appointment, next to useless.

She is pretty much the opposite of 'strong and stable' - everyone can see that now.

She is gone soon..don't know when...this is not the right time - the Tories won't want a leadership contest, or, God forbid, another election.

At some point we may well get that complete Goon Boris in charge..last seen hanging in the air on some zip-wire contraption, and regularly seen on photos of Bullingdon Club members.

Wind your neck in lad I've not even read the book you posted as I'm not interested. You gathered I don't know much about politics on one post just saying I'm glad Corbyn didn't win.

I know enough to make an informed decision and researched the hell out of both parties and candidates history the more I read about Corbyn and the more I read on Labour posts on there referendum, the more I saw of Labours cabinet on TV the more I knew they were incompetent.

ClaretRock · Post by **ClaretRock** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:40 pm

Just like to add I don't like May but she is better than him.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:56 pm

ClaretRock ...'Wind your neck in lad I've not even read the book you posted ..'

I didn't post any book..?..

Are you ok?

ClaretRock · Post by **ClaretRock** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:02 pm

Haha not posted a book I'm surprised you didn't put chapters in.

whereeaglesfly · Post by **whereeaglesfly** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:44 pm

May is not anywhere near a match for Corbyn, only a fool would think so after the shambles she has presided over.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:02 pm

There's a good reason Jremy Corbyn was never given ANY responsibility in the Labour Party until Momentum and UNITE propped him up as their patsy.

whereeaglesfly · Post by **whereeaglesfly** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:07 pm

I believe it was initially Margaret Beckett who originally got him to stand and that he then won two leadership contests. Didn't realize she was in either of those organizations.As for Mrs May, she looks after the interests of her own kind.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:48 pm

"Momentum is a left-wing British political organisation.[2] It was founded in 2015 by Jon Lansman, four weeks after Jeremy Corbyn's successful campaign for the Labour Party leadership"

(Ok, so it's Wikipedia, but it's sourced - links below)

Rowls lying about Corbyn again? Well, colour me surprised.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... t-momentum" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/st ... ld-they-be" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:02 pm

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:05 pm

Greenmile wrote:"Momentum is a left-wing British political organisation.[2] It was founded in 2015 by Jon Lansman, four weeks after Jeremy Corbyn's successful campaign for the Labour Party leadership"

(Ok, so it's Wikipedia, but it's sourced - links below)

Rowls lying about Corbyn again? Well, colour me surprised.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... t-momentum" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/st ... ld-they-be" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corbyn was elected Labour leader by Tories who paid the modest membership fee

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:06 pm

Damo wrote:Corbyn was elected Labour leader by Tories who paid the modest membership fee

No he wasn't.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:12 pm

Damo wrote:Corbyn was elected Labour leader by Tories who paid the modest membership fee

Did you mean to quote me? It's just I can't see the connection between your post and mine.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:14 pm

Damo wrote:Corbyn was elected Labour leader by Tories who paid the modest membership fee

Well that worked out well! Tories had a majority when he was elected.

On a wider point, even though Labour lost he has changed politics in this country for good. Massive paradigm shift these last few weeks.

bluelabrador16 · Post by **bluelabrador16** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:38 pm

Jeff Wells

"What can we learn from this long history? For one, given the scale, persistence, and often dishonesty of the nearly two-year long campaign to undermine Corbyn, Labour’s election result is particularly astounding. If Corbyn can lead Labour to its biggest gain in vote share in seventy years with all this, imagine what the party could do when its MPs are actually trying to help their leader win.

"Secondly, Corbyn’s journey highlights once again that all the typical rhetoric and rules around objectivity, unity, and decorum go out of the window when a candidate is a leftist."

The Breaking Of The Corporate Media Monopoly

http://www.medialens.org/index.php/aler ... opoly.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:29 pm

Spiral wrote:Well that worked out well! Tories had a majority when he was elected.

On a wider point, even though Labour lost he has changed politics in this country for good. Massive paradigm shift these last few weeks.

No. Your correct. People were dancing on Labour's grave not too long ago. They assumed Corbyn was unelectable. It backfired massively

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:38 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:No he wasn't.

Yes he was

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:41 pm

But...

: IMG_20170616_223950.jpg (428.36 KiB) Viewed 3936 times

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:44 pm

Damo wrote: They assumed Corbyn was unelectable. It backfired massively

He still hasn't been elected.

And that's with May 'apparently' destroying the NHS, cutting the police force by thousands, young people finally coming out to vote, nearly half the country voting to remain in Europe, letting nutty Mussies kills us, destroying local services and never once being elected herself.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:51 pm

Bin Ont Turf wrote:He still hasn't been elected.

And that's with May 'apparently' destroying the NHS, cutting the police force by thousands, young people finally coming out to vote, nearly half the country voting to remain in Europe, letting nutty Mussies kills us, destroying local services and never once being elected herself.

You can find quotes online by Tories stating they will never post an honest manifesto again.
That will be the legacy of this general election.
People hate politicians because they are dishonest, but not if they are dishonest with promises that give them a few extra quid for doing a bit less

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:58 pm

Damo wrote: but not if they are dishonest with promises that give them a few extra quid for doing a bit less

The Labour manifesto for the past 20 odd years.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:59 pm

Damo wrote:But...IMG_20170616_223950.jp

Context: Lib Dem surge in '10 suppressed the Con vote, closing the gap between Lab and Con.

Lab 2010: 258 seats/~8.61m votes/29%
Lab 2015: 232 seats/~9.35m votes/30.4%

(An increase in the vote share resulted in fewer seats in '15. This is why context is important)

Lab 2017: 262 seats/~12.87m votes/40%

The 'un-electable' left wing candidate out-performed the New Labour and left-of-centre candidates by seats, popular vote and vote share. In terms of a paradigm shift in British politics this absolutely cannot be disputed.

ClaretRock · Post by **ClaretRock** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:03 pm

I'm not sure May wanted to win going after the pensioners like they did. Their cuts targeted there voters. Mabe the country is that fked they wanted to hand it over to Corbyn to blame it on him. Still I voted for them as Corbyn IS unelectable in my eyes. Mabe in 5 years time if they have a decent leader labours time will come but it isn't now.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:03 pm

I'm being thick, here. How do you quote an image an make it appear in the quote box? I know I've done it before. My brain has stopped working.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:07 pm

Spiral wrote:I'm being thick, here. How do you quote an image an make it appear in the quote box? I know I've done it before. My brain has stopped working.

I crop it using a third party app. Store it to my phone then add it using the attachment option

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:10 pm

ClaretRock wrote:I'm not sure May wanted to win going after the pensioners like they did. Their cuts targeted there voters. Mabe the country is that fked they wanted to hand it over to Corbyn to blame it on him. Still I voted for them as Corbyn IS unelectable in my eyes. Mabe in 5 years time if they have a decent leader labours time will come but it isn't now.

Assuming you sincerely believe that the Tories actually attempted to lose, would you give your vote to a party that attempted to dodge responsibility (despite said party conjuring this poisoned chalice in the first place) in pursuit of long-term party-political gain rather than put their head above the parapet and try to improve the lot of the people whom they are ostensibly elected to represent?

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:11 pm

Damo wrote:I crop it using a third party app. Store it to my phone then add it using the attachment option

Makes sense. Cheers, Damo.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:12 pm

Quick question, do have any reliable figure for the amount of tactical voting going on?

I voted labour, but it was purely to stop the Conservatives and their version of Brexit. I'm sure I'm not alone in that, but it does seem to be the first election where tactical voting had a major effect.

Interestingly, if Lab voters in Tory/Lib Dem marginals had tactically voted, JC would be PM now.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:17 pm

Valid point. Not sure if that is quantifiable, but it likely had an impact. Proportional representation could have given people the opportunity to vote tactically without giving outright support to a leader they dislike.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:26 pm

Yeah, but you can't help feeling that if Lab get in on FPTP, they won't be that interested in changing it again.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:42 pm

Don't disagree. I've always voted Labour and I'm aware it could hurt them but I'd still like to see a commitment to PR. Allows me to use other parties as a pressure group if the party I support abandons its values and principles.

ClaretRock · Post by **ClaretRock** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:43 pm

Spiral wrote:Assuming you sincerely believe that the Tories actually attempted to lose, would you give your vote to a party that attempted to dodge responsibility (despite said party conjuring this poisoned chalice in the first place) in pursuit of long-term party-political gain rather than put their head above the parapet and try to improve the lot of the people whom they are ostensibly elected to represent?

It was a hard choice I didn't want to vote at times but I made my decision based on what I had seen from labour, the fact I don't think I could stand someone like Corbyn in having served in NI. The only option I had was to vote for May to try and stop him. This election has genuinely been stressful for me and by the sounds of it many others. Overlooking the fact Corbyn is Labour leader. If the country is as bad as I think it is I wouldn't vote for a party who is looking at blowing the budget on university grants (we all know what a lot of that goes on so they can pay for it themselves), school meals for All kids when the ones that need it can already get free school meals (nice idea for all but not needed) to name a few. I don't trust Labour so I had to vote conservative. Corbyn just made it an easier decision.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:48 pm

I appreciate your points but in the interest of balance I'd have to point out that, as far as anecdotal evidence is concerned, older members of my own family served in NI and sadly lost friends during the troubles, but still voted Labour last week. I understand your point, though.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:50 pm

Point I always make when NI comes up is the chat I had with my brother-in-laws uncle, who was a senior member of the RUC and survived an IRA attack on him.

"Its better now than it was then he said, and thats worth it."

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:53 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1heFHnGB8zw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ClaretRock · Post by **ClaretRock** » Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:55 pm

Spiral wrote:I appreciate your points but in the interest of balance I'd have to point out that, as far as anecdotal evidence is concerned, older members of my own family served in NI and sadly lost friends during the troubles, but still voted Labour last week. I understand your point, though.

Like I said it was a hard choice and I can see why people wanted to vote for labour. They seemed to be sticking it to the cooperations and the rich but I didn't buy it. The IRA murdered two of my mates. I couldn't vote for him.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:12 am

Since his early days in that 7 bedroom Manor House Corbyn has been a defender of freedom fighters in a sense, along with the bulk of his family. No way has he changed his views recently, he is just covering them up because he knows they are toxic.

Saying that though, I understand why people voted for him.

Many people, young in particular, view things in different ways. I was in the pub tonight talking to some young chaps about Corbyn and Ireland, and also about the potential EU army and how they would feel about Germany ending up taking some of France's nuclear weapons or having influence over them.

These young chaps just looked at me bemused, like "why does that matter in this day and age". Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I suspect though, using both examples, that we will find out.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:16 am

ClaretRock wrote:It was a hard choice I didn't want to vote at times but I made my decision based on what I had seen from labour, the fact I don't think I could stand someone like Corbyn in having served in NI. The only option I had was to vote for May to try and stop him. This election has genuinely been stressful for me and by the sounds of it many others. Overlooking the fact Corbyn is Labour leader. If the country is as bad as I think it is I wouldn't vote for a party who is looking at blowing the budget on university grants (we all know what a lot of that goes on so they can pay for it themselves), school meals for All kids when the ones that need it can already get free school meals (nice idea for all but not needed) to name a few. I don't trust Labour so I had to vote conservative. Corbyn just made it an easier decision.

My brother served in NI, but wholly endorsed Corbyn, as he saw the fact Corbyn is simply against violence. Dare I ask how you feel now the party you voted for is now in negotiation with a party backed by violent organisations in NI?

As for free tuition and free school meals - I don't see this as blowing the budget. Most people can afford school meals, but providing them free means nobody falls through the cracks and it's far more efficient to provide for everyone. And the saving per household is about £440 per child each year - money likely to be spent in the wider economy, so not just thrown away. If you agree with the Tory corporate tax cuts, then this is like a consumer version of the same thing.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:18 am

Corbyn wasn't in the IRA, for what it's worth. On purely logical grounds, any attempts to invalidate his candidacy by attributing guilt by association, IMO at least, falls down when you consider that successive UK gotvs have provided the military support and the means to entrench the power of regimes that propagate Wahhabism, yet Corbyn seems to be the only one floating the idea of diplomatic solutions to conflict and a sincere and frank acknowledgement and identification of the roots of terrorism. I get that this might be considered a false equivalence but I'm firmly of the opinion that decades from now people will view him as being on the right side of history. I'm not a cultist-I've enough self awareness to know that; he's merely representing what many people who hold my worldview have been saying for ages.

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:24 am

AndrewJB wrote:My brother served in NI, but wholly endorsed Corbyn, as he saw the fact Corbyn is simply against violence. Dare I ask how you feel now the party you voted for is now in negotiation with a party backed by violent organisations in NI?

Yes. "The ignorance of the youth" loses its impact as a line of attack when the UK PM undermines the Good Friday agreement to achieve a tenuous grip on power.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:40 am

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:49 am

Spiral wrote:Corbyn wasn't in the IRA, for what it's worth. On purely logical grounds, any attempts to invalidate his candidacy by attributing guilt by association, IMO at least, falls down when you consider that successive UK gotvs have provided the military support and the means to entrench the power of regimes that propagate Wahhabism, yet Corbyn seems to be the only one floating the idea of diplomatic solutions to conflict and a sincere and frank acknowledgement and identification of the roots of terrorism. I get that this might be considered a false equivalence but I'm firmly of the opinion that decades from now people will view him as being on the right side of history. I'm not a cultist-I've enough self awareness to know that; he's merely representing what many people who hold my worldview have been saying for ages.

Corbyn was also demonstrating in support of Nelson Mandela; at the same time the Tory government was supporting the Apartht regime in SA. And the infamous "Hang Mandela" posters were put out by Young Conservatives. During the election nobody questioned Theresa May about whether or not she supported Apartheid. And nor did the press balance their "terrorist sympathiser" coverage of Corbyn by mentioning his anti-racism work.

The smears on Corbyn have long ago run their course. They won't work on the younger generation, and that generation is already at work persuading their aged relatives of what nonsense it is. In the next election the battleground will be "what will you do for me?"

And unless the Tories can pull a rabbit out of the hat, Corbyn will take it.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 1:20 am

If it be your will wrote:I was talking to someone in the military before the election, who said Corbyn had huge levels of support because of Iraq and Afghanistan. It wasn't a Labour thing at all, but after the 'complete betrayal' of these two wars, they desperately wanted someone that if they were sent to war, they could at least be certain it would be for morally just reasons.

It was quite an eye-opener, because for some unknown reason I'd always assumed the military would be almost unanimously Conservative.

It impossible to underestimate the betrayal that was the Iraq War. These people volunteer to give their lives to us and only ask in return that we use their sacrifice for something worthwhile, like the defence of our country or of those who cannot defend themselves. But instead we let these people give their lives in order for some oil companies to earn even more money. After Iraq we don't deserve these people who would give their lives for us.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 1:26 am

A few points to contest.

whereeaglesfly wrote:I believe it was initially Margaret Beckett who originally got him to stand and that he then won two leadership contests. Didn't realize she was in either of those organizations.As for Mrs May, she looks after the interests of her own kind.

Many people got Corbyn to stand. Many are on record admitting they deeply regret the direction they sent the Labour Party. He was not expected to win. He was a 40-1 outsider when he secured his last-minute nomination to "widen the debate".

What "kind" is Mrs May? Was her manifesto designed to appeal only to vicar's daughters? Perhaps so? It was atrociously bad but the suggestion she does not care for society as a whole is stinking BS. She cares deeply about all social issues. As do well over 99% over our politicians of all persuasions.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Interestingly, if Lab voters in Tory/Lib Dem marginals had tactically voted, JC would be PM now.

More interestingly, this assumption presumes nobody did... *duh*

Spiral wrote:Corbyn wasn't in the IRA, for what it's worth. On purely logical grounds, any attempts to invalidate his candidacy by attributing guilt by association, IMO at least, falls down when you consider that successive UK gotvs have provided the military support and the means to entrench the power of regimes that propagate Wahhabism, yet Corbyn seems to be the only one floating the idea of diplomatic solutions to conflict and a sincere and frank acknowledgement and identification of the roots of terrorism. I get that this might be considered a false equivalence but I'm firmly of the opinion that decades from now people will view him as being on the right side of history. I'm not a cultist-I've enough self awareness to know that; he's merely representing what many people who hold my worldview have been saying for ages.

False equivalence, NO.

Bullsh:t, yes.

Corbyn supported the IRA during the troubles, He did nothing to support any other side. His support was unequivocal. History will judge him by his own words and actions - he is also a self-professed "friend" of Hamas.

Diane Abbot admitted it. John McDonnell is on record also.

Corbyn just lied about it.

Spiral wrote:Yes. "The ignorance of the youth" loses its impact as a line of attack when the UK PM undermines the Good Friday agreement to achieve a tenuous grip on power.

No. You're claiming that young people cannot be more susceptible to propaganda and ideology because Theresa May could sign a deal with the DUP? Therefore the youth were correct because they predicted an event that ... erm ... nobody predicted?

You're claiming Corbyn voters voted for Corbyn to prevent a Conservative-DUP coalition?

Please attempt to explain yourself here but don't expect a reply. Your logic is atrocious.

AndrewJB wrote:Corbyn was also demonstrating in support of Nelson Mandela; at the same time the Tory government was supporting the Apartht regime in SA.

This is plain bullsh:t. Margaret Thatcher was the head of a nation who Mandela saw after his release. The Conservative position was far more intelligent than yourself in the way it opposed apartheid. And far more effective.

If it were all down to leftist placards, Mandela would have rotted in a cell. It was carefully applied international pressure that secured his release. The reason Mandela is drawn to the Labour Party has nothing to do with them doing anything practical to secure his release and everything to do with the deceased man's far-Left, Marxist economic politics, as evidenced in dirt-poor current-day South Africa.

******

There you have it my politically inclined followers - answers to some of your questions. Some of your responses were better than others. Some were plain silly or stupendously ignorant.

Please don't expect regular replies from me these days, I simply don't have the time.

Lots of love

Rowls

PS: God Save the Queen and allez le Brexit!

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 1:40 am

If it be your will wrote:I was talking to someone in the military before the election, who said Corbyn had huge levels of support because of Iraq and Afghanistan. It wasn't a Labour thing at all, but after the 'complete betrayal' of these two wars, they desperately wanted someone that if they were sent to war, they could at least be certain it would be for morally just reasons.

It was quite an eye-opener, because for some unknown reason I'd always assumed the military would be almost unanimously Conservative.

I can fully believe this.

I don't believe for one second the stupidly cynical idea that our troops were sent off to war "for oil" or, even worse "for big business" but the fact that our troops have been far too readily deployed (ie. had their actual, sacred lives put at risk - and even lost) by politicians too quick to jump into conflict is an absolute truth.

The stupid "Lybia intervention" for example was a low-point in Cameron's otherwise successful premiership. The rebellion against him fully justified when he tried again to commit British troops to the Syrian conflict in which we have no Godly reason to intervene.

The fact that a man who supported war against our own troops (Jeremy Corby) should benefit from a desire to protect our own sticks in my throat but it is easy to see why a man who paints himself as a "pacifist" could win votes that way. Was he such a "pacifist" when he supported the IRA? Was he a "pacifist" when it came to sharing platforms with Muslim terrorist organisations?

That is why his links with terrorist organisations matter. That is why his support of the IRA, his platforming sharing with Islamist terrorists matter - because he is not for our troops - he is against them, and he is always against the deployment of British troops.

It doesn't matter how just our cause is. He is always against British troops. He described the Falklands War as a "Tory Plot". Make of that whatever you will, particularly if you are currently serving in our armed forces or know a friend or relative who is.

He consistently supports the enemy of the British soldier.

This is something well worth remembering and something which was not a talking point at the last election.