Brexit - Labour's position

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:20 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Teresa May doesnt have the blood of 250,000 innocent Iraqi chidren on her hands..............

Don't pretend you give a **** about Iraqi children. Like Trump i'm pretty sure if one of them walked up to you and sought refuge over here you'd tell him to **** off.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:22 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Facts haven't mattered in this country for quite some time. Nothing Corbyn can say or do will stop the conservative press painting him as some kind of far-left extremist and the idiots that read their nonsense will lap it all up in much the same way the American voters lapped it up that Hillary was the devil, or that Obama was a failure.

Politics has become a team sport, and the right-wing (some on the left but especially the right) seem to love anything that hurts the other side, the fact that it's untrue doesn't matter; to them it's just their side playing 4d super-chess.

"The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness." —Hanah Arendt

You know, flip the words "right" to "left", and "Corbyn" to "Trump/Farage" and that is a post that would get thousands of share by people who absolutely believe it; if posted by a milio or PJW type.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:25 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Er, Pstotto, I think the map of france you got your figures from is a bit wrong.

Areas of high unemployment voted for Le Pen, but the cities voted for Macron

A bit like the UK in fact, where many of the strongly pro- Brexit constituencies have very little immigration from the EU, (Sunderland being an obvious case in point - [just 3% - and most of them from outside the EU]), and most of the cities were pro-remain. (Some of them quite strongly so).

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:28 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:A bit like the UK in fact, where many of the strongly pro- Brexit constituencies have very little immigration from the EU, (Sunderland being an obvious case in point - [just 3% - and most of them from outside the EU]), and most of the cities were pro-remain. (Some of them quite strongly so).

How mental that cities with the most EU migrants voted by majority to remain... Wonders will never cease if the Turkeys fail to vote for Christmas.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:32 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Teresa May doesnt have the blood of 250,000 innocent Iraqi chidren on her hands..............

If that is what you were referring to why were all your quotes referencing Blair changing his mind about the EU? Linking the two seems a bit strange (and a bit concerning how Theresa May may turn out).

It's almost as if you've completely ignored what May said with regard to the EU.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:33 pm

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:35 pm

Darthlaw wrote:How mental that cities with the most EU migrants voted by majority to remain... Wonders will never cease if the Turkeys fail to vote for Christmas.

An obvious point and a cheap hit to make but you're usually much better than that.
Whilst it's true that you might expect the EU migrants to vote remain. As I think you know, they weren't allowed to vote - unless they were UK citizens, and that's a very tiny proportion of them.
Further, even if they all had been able to vote, they would still be much in the minority (single figures in percentage terms), so you might assume that the majority UK population would have voted more strongly to leave if they felt that EU immigration was a bad thing.
EDIT: Just checked there were 2.9 million EU citizens who are permitted to vote in local elections and European elections, and eligible for jury service, but they were not permitted to vote in the EU referendum. (I'm not trying to open that debate again, just supporting my point.)

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:36 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Facts haven't mattered in this country for quite some time. Nothing Corbyn can say or do will stop the conservative press painting him as some kind of far-left extremist and the idiots that read their nonsense will lap it all up in much the same way the American voters lapped it up that Hillary was the devil, or that Obama was a failure.

Politics has become a team sport, and the right-wing (some on the left but especially the right) seem to love anything that hurts the other side, the fact that it's untrue doesn't matter; to them it's just their side playing 4d super-chess.

"The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness." —Hanah Arendt

Corbyn doesn't need the right wing press to make him out as a left wing extremist, just listen to his own words in the Marr interview on Sunday, he won't take out the leader of ISIS and won't protect this country against nuclear attack.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:38 pm

claretandy wrote: won't protect this country against nuclear attack.

In all fairness I can't see an attack ever happening and a reduction in nuclear armament wouldn't be an issue.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:41 pm

I like Keir Starmer, he's prepared to "make an effort."

We accept that outside the EU our relationship with Europe must change. But we do not accept that Brexit has to mean whatever Theresa May says it means. We recognise that immigration rules will have to change as we exit the EU, but we do not believe that immigration should be the overarching priority. We do not believe that leaving the EU means severing our ties with Europe. We do not believe that Brexit means weakening workers’ rights and environmental protections or slashing corporate tax rates.

Meaning: (1) UK will leave EU; (2) But, we won't do it like TM will; (3) Immigration rules will change, but we don't say how we would change them; (4) UK will leave EU, but not be cut-off from Europe (or should this also be EU?). We know that Tories have said exactly the same thing - but hope you don't know this; (5) Brexit won't mean weaker workers' rights, but hope you think that because we say this we are suggesting you should worry about Tories weakening workers' rights; (6) ditto environmental protections (and we no longer support the coal miners or steel workers); we won't "slash" corporate tax rates, of course we won't "slash" any taxes, because we are the party of high taxes.

A Labour Government would reset the Tories failing approach to Brexit.

Meaning: We are an opposition party, so we oppose what the government is doing and will say that they are failing - even if we don't say what we would do.

It is extraordinary that we have a Prime Minister who has given up on the Single Market and the Customs Union even before negotiations have begun, but is so willing to talk up the chance of there being no deal reached. Theresa May has said that no deal is better than a bad deal. Boris Johnson has said no deal is no problem. Labour are very clear that no deal is the worst possible deal. A Labour approach to Brexit means ending this reckless approach.

Meaning: The Labour party is beginning to understand that trade matters, that the ability to sell things is where we create wealth - but, don't expect us to understand all the other things that are required to sell things, successfully. Profits are still bad. Please forget that our party leader wants to stop the "wealth extractors" creating wealth. (Yes, all political parties are inconsistent). We haven't worked out that the negotiations will be with 27 other countries. We haven't worked out that the deal we will get also depends on those 27 other countries, plus the EU Commission plus the EU MEPs. And, we put our fingers in our ear when the EU was saying that they will only offer UK a "hard" deal.

A Labour approach to Brexit means legislating to guarantee that Parliament has a truly meaningful vote on the final Brexit deal.

Meaning: We aren't in Gov't. We don't expect to be in Gov't. If we were in Gov't we would let Parliament have a vote, and we mean it. So, once we've agreed the deal with the EU and all the EU27, Commission and MEPs have agreed that deal, we will ask Parliament to vote on the deal. But, we don't know what we will do if Parliament doesn't support it. We already know that the EU won't offer to improve the deal, maybe the EU will offer to make the deal harder? Or maybe we will have to ask Parliament to have another "meaningful" vote - until they get it right?

A Labour Government will also mean a new approach to how we treat EU nationals in the UK. It is shameful that the Prime Minister rejected repeated attempts by Labour to resolve this before Article 50 was triggered. As a result, 3 million EU nationals have suffered unnecessary uncertainty, as well as the 1.2 million UK citizens living in the EU. EU nationals do not just contribute to our society: they are our society. And they should not be used as bargaining chips.

Meaning: TM would do what we have asked re EU immigrants. We weren't listening when TM asked the EU to settle this last year. We weren't listening when EU said "no." And, we haven't understood what they EU wants the deal to be for EU immigrants, plus their families, plus - and it will all be subject to the European Court of Justice. But, it's still shameful that there's been some uncertainty and we will blame TM for this, even though she tried to resolve this last year (but we hope you've forgotten that). Oh, and there are 1.2 million UK citizens living in Europe - we've mentioned them, but we aren't saying that we want their position resolved at the same time as we resolve the EU immigrants in UK, no that would be "bargaining" - and we'd rather not resolve their situation, even if some of them might be people who used to vote for us. Isn't it enough that we mentioned 1.2 million UK citizens, even though we don't say we are bothered about their situation. Well, they don't live here any more, so they can't be part of "our society."

A Labour Government who will reset our approach to Brexit, rebuild relations with the EU and make sure that jobs, the economy and rights come first.

Good luck with all of that.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:44 pm

I'll just repeat for the ones who are refusing to accept the fundamental flaw in Labour thinking on this.

1) They had a chance to put all this on the table and force the Cons to listen to them in the Houses of Parliament, but they didn't

2) They are going to get crushed, so they won't be able to do anything to stop the Conservatives doing what they want.

Realising now that they should have done something a couple of months ago just makes them look even more incompetent. And that is a feat all in itself.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:44 pm

surprisingly sensible plan from labour and a strong speech from starmer.

we're leaving the eu but not leaving europe so the more co-operative approach to the negotiations is the right one, and will serve our country better; streets ahead of this ridiculous tory plan where the eu is the enemy.

we're leaving but we don't need to be dicks about it.

they've got a lot of convincing of a lot of people to do though.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:47 pm

If it be your will wrote:Even you must be thinking "Come on May, say something!"

It looks like Labour weren't kidding when they said they've been on an election footing since September.

And, yet we've had other posts suggesting that it was unfair to have an general election because they other parties (Labour and the rest) had had no opportunity to prepare for Brexit negotiations.

And, then there are the reports about Labour party recent meeting with civil service, so that they can prepare for a change of gov't (not a forecst, just usual protocols) - apparently they meeting was very quiet, with not a lot to discuss.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:59 pm

claretandy wrote:Corbyn doesn't need the right wing press to make him out as a left wing extremist, just listen to his own words in the Marr interview on Sunday, he won't take out the leader of ISIS and won't protect this country against nuclear attack.

Here's the interview. Please provide timestamped links (or just the times) Corbyn says both those things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqvR00lU_8s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:00 pm

"Good job we've got someone in charge who tells the truth now."

I don't doubt that TM meant it when she said it. The point is that she is a democrat by implementing what the people have told her to do, unlike the undemoratic Liberals and the fudde fudge Labour. Just maybe some want her to do her job badly and get a crap deal so we don't have to leave.

Even better can you imagine if Corbyn was PM and our lead in the discussions. It would be an absolute disaster. We would end up staying in but lose our rebate and current opt outs, become part of Shengen and be charged costs for the whole process. Just think about it before you cast your vote.

Juncker to JC. "What do you want out of this JC?"

JC, "I don't really know (in the voice of Mavis from Corrie)" and then just banged on about workers rights, but ignored the fact that low pay here is mainly caused by eastern european recruitment.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:04 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Here's the interview. Please provide timestamped links (or just the times) Corbyn says both those things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqvR00lU_8s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Its my interpretation on what he said, The direct question was" would you order a drone strike on the leader of ISIS ?" he waffled and wouldn't answer. He was asked if he would write the letters to authorize a nuclear strike, again he waffled and wouldn't answer.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:05 pm

I know one thing for sure, you went to the same school as Ringo.

Isn't the meaning of Democracy not taught anymore or something?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:06 pm

Its my interpretation on what he said

And you've interpreted it the way you want to interpret it.

Thats not the same as him saying it.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:07 pm

Its got to a **** poor state of affairs when I'm defended the most useless leader in labour history.

I must feel sorry for him or something.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:08 pm

ClaretMoffitt wrote:You know, flip the words "right" to "left", and "Corbyn" to "Trump/Farage" and that is a post that would get thousands of share by people who absolutely believe it; if posted by a milio or PJW type.

Yeah, it's called projection. They know it's what they do so they accuse the other "team" of doing it so as to mitigate the accusation when it's laid against them. It allows idiots to say "but boths sides do it" when it's not even close to equivalent.

I've lost count of the number of times that Trump, for example, laid accusations against his political opponents only for it to emerge that he done/does the exact same thing. I've said before that there are probably some on the left that do this, but it seems to be a staple of right-wing, particularly far right-wing, politics and it's utterly corrosive.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:15 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Yeah, it's called projection. They know it's what they do so they accuse the other "team" of doing it so as to mitigate the accusation when it's laid against them. It allows idiots to say "but boths sides do it" when it's not even close to equivalent.

I've lost count of the number of times that Trump, for example, laid accusations against his political opponents only for it to emerge that he done/does the exact same thing. I've said before that there are probably some on the left that do this, but it seems to be a staple of right-wing, particularly far right-wing, politics and it's utterly corrosive.

Hi IT, and you've typed that with no thoughts of being ironic?

"they accuse the other team...." "right-wing, particularly far right-wing...."

Best just to agree that all sides do it, and maybe some of us do it on here.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:18 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:And you've interpreted it the way you want to interpret it.

Thats not the same as him saying it.

Not just my interpretation, journalists on Twitter were live tweeting what he said, we all know what he means.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:20 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi IT, and you've typed that with no thoughts of being ironic?

"they accuse the other team...." "right-wing, particularly far right-wing...."

Best just to agree that all sides do it, and maybe some of us do it on here.

This.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:25 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi IT, and you've typed that with no thoughts of being ironic?

"they accuse the other team...." "right-wing, particularly far right-wing...."

Best just to agree that all sides do it, and maybe some of us do it on here.

Are you (and Moffitt) trying to suggest that I project? If not then how could my post possibly be ironic?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:37 pm

Sidney1st wrote:More importantly, we all agree he's a massive tool?

Tools are useful.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:55 pm

Wait. Jeremy Corbyn isn't willing to murder hundreds of thousands of innocent people?

What a demented psycho.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:14 pm

claretandy wrote:Not just my interpretation, journalists on Twitter were live tweeting what he said, we all know what he means.

Lol. Yeah, OK.

what he really means is he'll allow a nuclear attack on the UK. You unhinged moron.

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:26 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Are you (and Moffitt) trying to suggest that I project? If not then how could my post possibly be ironic?

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:28 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Lol. Yeah, OK. what he really means is he'll allow a nuclear attack on the UK. You unhinged moron.

Ok you sweaty sock, how's your bid for freedom going ?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:29 pm

claretandy wrote:Ok you sweaty sock, how's your bid for freedom going ?

I'm already free, mate. How's yours?

NCClaret · Post by **NCClaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:32 pm

Paul Waine: I think your analysis is absolutely 'spot-on'

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:33 pm

aggi wrote:If that is what you were referring to why were all your quotes referencing Blair changing his mind about the EU? Linking the two seems a bit strange (and a bit concerning how Theresa May may turn out).

It's almost as if you've completely ignored what May said with regard to the EU.

Well I'd say that May said the first couple of quotes PRIOR to the referendum.

Seeing as the main man in the Remain camp, who vowed to stay on as prime minister regardless of the vote, hot footed it quick style.

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ither-side" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(So another remain whopper!)

That referendum, which was the biggest expression of democracy Britain as seen. Saw the Leave campaigners win, by well over a million votes. She as a true democrat, was willing to put aside her pre referendum views, and carry out the will of the winning side.

It's not difficult to understand. It's simply democracy.

Now onto your last quote about "no elections till 2020".

Your last quote was made PRIOR to SNP, Labour , illiberal antiDemocrats and Remoaner tories, In the House of Lords colluding and threatening to attempt to block brexit.

It was PRIOR to the SNP, the illiberal antiDemocrats and Remoaner labour MPs threatening to vote against The Great Repeal Bill.

It was PRIOR to the illiberal antiDemocrats threatening to "bring parliamentary business to a grinding halt"

It's was PRIOR to the unashamed self publicist and democracy denying multimillionairess , threatening yet another attempt at stopping Brexit, Gina Miller, by going for a 2nd vote in parliament, on any deal achieved by the government. Which would incentivise the EU to give us the worst possible deal.

So with the threat of the Will of the British people being thwarted by the petulant children like Tiny Tim Farron, she had no choice.

I could have said all that. But preferred, instead to point out that the person you are sticking up for, is a war criminal and should be hanging from the nearest available lamp post.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:49 pm

summitclaret wrote:"Good job we've got someone in charge who tells the truth now."

I don't doubt that TM meant it when she said it. The point is that she is a democrat by implementing what the people have told her to do, unlike the undemoratic Liberals and the fudde fudge Labour. Just maybe some want her to do her job badly and get a crap deal so we don't have to leave.

Even better can you imagine if Corbyn was PM and our lead in the discussions. It would be an absolute disaster. We would end up staying in but lose our rebate and current opt outs, become part of Shengen and be charged costs for the whole process. Just think about it before you cast your vote.

Juncker to JC. "What do you want out of this JC?"

JC, "I don't really know (in the voice of Mavis from Corrie)" and then just banged on about workers rights, but ignored the fact that low pay here is mainly caused by eastern european recruitment.

Corbyn's said for a long time that we have to strengthen labour laws to prevent unscrupulous employers from underpaying workers. Catch up!

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:57 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Well I'd say that May said the first couple of quotes PRIOR to the referendum.

Seeing as the main man in the Remain camp, who vowed to stay on as prime minister regardless of the vote, hot footed it quick style.

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ither-side" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(So another remain whopper!)

That referendum, which was the biggest expression of democracy Britain as seen. Saw the Leave campaigners win, by well over a million votes. She as a true democrat, was willing to put aside her pre referendum views, and carry out the will of the winning side.

It's not difficult to understand. It's simply democracy.

Now onto your last quote about "no elections till 2020".

Your last quote was made PRIOR to SNP, Labour , illiberal antiDemocrats and Remoaner tories, In the House of Lords colluding and threatening to attempt to block brexit.

It was PRIOR to the SNP, the illiberal antiDemocrats and Remoaner labour MPs threatening to vote against The Great Repeal Bill.

It was PRIOR to the illiberal antiDemocrats threatening to "bring parliamentary business to a grinding halt"

It's was PRIOR to the unashamed self publicist and democracy denying multimillionairess , threatening yet another attempt at stopping Brexit, Gina Miller, by going for a 2nd vote in parliament, on any deal achieved by the government. Which would incentivise the EU to give us the worst possible deal.

So with the threat of the Will of the British people being thwarted by the petulant children like Tiny Tim Farron, she had no choice.

I could have said all that. But preferred, instead to point out that the person you are sticking up for, is a war criminal and should be hanging from the nearest available lamp post.

Do you not recall Theresa May cheerfully telling parliament that she'd have no problem pressing the button and killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people including women and children?

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:00 pm

Are we seriously arguing that TM is as bad as Tony Blair in this thread? Are peoples Brexit opinions really so strong as they are prepared to defend that piece of literal human trash.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:03 pm

Its very early days yet to decide whether TM will be a good PM or not.

Blair was terrible with foreign policy, but he did well (though with high costs) at home.

Whether she likes it or not, TM reign is going to be dominated by two things, Brexit and another Scottish referendum, and who knows how they are going to go?

gtclaret · Post by **gtclaret** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:14 pm

The EU does not negocite, it dictates.It uses access to the single market as a weapon to force other power grabbing measures.The UK is mistaken to think the EU will not hurt it's own citizens in order to hurt UK.Since when has the EU cared about the general public.The EU will decide on the terms and we take or leave it,we are not dealing with a reasonable democratic accountable body.It does not matter what any party says about Brexit , the EU will decide.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:58 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Are you (and Moffitt) trying to suggest that I project? If not then how could my post possibly be ironic?

I'm wondering whether your response, above, is a double bluff.

Yes, you project. But, no worries, I also project.

Now what was I saying about being ironic?

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:04 pm

A good example:

http://newsthump.com/2017/04/24/tories- ... ialnetwork" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:13 pm

If it be your will wrote:Labour are very clear that no deal is the worst possible deal

Oh great. Junker and co will be delighted to know they can offer us next to nothing and we will gratefully accept it.
This sounds just like the time Gordon Brown negotiated our gold stocks away.

It's frightening to think that some people would happily see idiots like these in control of the purse strings

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:34 pm

Paul Waine wrote:I'm wondering whether your response, above, is a double bluff.

Yes, you project. But, no worries, I also project.

Now what was I saying about being ironic?

OK. Maybe speak for yourself because you'll find it difficult to find an example of me projecting anything I am guilty of onto others.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:49 pm

AndrewJB wrote:Do you not recall Theresa May cheerfully telling parliament that she'd have no problem pressing the button and killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people including women and children?

Saying you'd be prepared to use the last choice option to defend your country, while, in reality, hoping you never have to.

Is very different to invading ANOTHER country, killing millions of innocents and sacrificing your own military service men. And you first choice option was to lie to your OWN.

Tony Bliar and his globalist pay masters - They created a desert and declared it democracy.(Iraq)

Cameron and Sarkozy - As above (Libya)

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:19 am

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:48 am

If it be your will wrote:I'm not sure 94,000 square miles of radioactive molten earth really constitutes a country, because that's all you'd be defending by then. I actually forgive May for saying she would retaliate in these circumstances, because telling the truth would have been politically suicidal. The truth is, of course, she would not retaliate. Nobody in UK high office is unhinged enough to actually do that - kill millions of people for no apparent reason. America might, perhaps, but not us.

Of more concern on this issue were the words spoken by defence secretary Michael Fallon on the Today Programme on 24th April:

This is a truly radical departure from the decades-old mantra that they would only ever be used in retaliation against a nuclear attack. Are we moving towards an era where these weapons are considered part of the 'normal' military arsenal?

(As you already know, you won't catch me defending Blair's foreign policy)

Hopefully they're never normalised. And remember when the USA did use them on Japan, nobody else had them.

The theory of mutually assured destruction hadnt come into it then.

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Wed May 03, 2017 9:20 pm

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Wed May 03, 2017 9:47 pm

May has been an embarrassment for some time, but it's got to the point where she is now a serious danger to this country.