• We are currently running a full reindex on the database following a problem yesterday morning (Thursday 5th December).
    This will take a few hours to complete and during this time, search results will be incomplete or non-existant. Apologies for the inconvenience.

General Election 2019

Who will you be voting for

  • Labour

    Votes: 59 21.3%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 121 43.7%
  • Brexit party if they run

    Votes: 22 7.9%
  • Lib dems

    Votes: 43 15.5%
  • SNP

    Votes: 16 5.8%
  • Greens

    Votes: 9 3.2%
  • DUP

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 7 2.5%

  • Total voters
    277
  • This poll will close: .

Pacifico

Distinguished Member
I believe it was that the Conservative inaction over the last few years means that they are not somehow immune from criticism. And that if Boris is going to blame the previous Labour government, he should also take a look at the subsequent Conservative/Coalition governments too. But that's politically inconvenient. That's my take anyway.
But there wasnt inaction - the Tories scrapped Labours automatic parole and put the Parole Board back in the decision making process.

Should they have made that rule retrospective for all cases - by recent events most definitely, but to say they were doing nothing is simply rewriting history.
 

Pacifico

Distinguished Member
UK factories are laying off workers at fastest rate for seven years
Britain’s factories are laying off workers at the fastest rate in seven years as manufacturing remains in the doldrums amid political and economic turmoil.
The monthly UK manufacturing snapshot from IHS Markit/Cips shows the headline purchasing managers’ index (PMI) slipped to 48.9 in November from 49.6 in October. It has been stuck for seven months below the 50 mark that separates expansion from contraction.
Not good news, we need a resolution to Brexit one way or the other rapidly, we cannot afford yet another year of indecision and uncertainty.

link
 

ostewart

Active Member
Couple of things.

1. According to Corbyn the London Bridge killing was down to Iraq. Something that was down to Labour and he was as much a part of as Boris was a member of the Conservatives.

But I guess that bringing Iraq up wasn't jumping on a bandwagon.

Just 48 hours after Usman Khan carried out his grisly, ISIS-inspired stabbing attack, Corbyn was linking it with the ‘war on terror’. In a speech yesterday he said the assault was wrong and wicked etc, etc, but it is also partly our fault, apparently. It happened because of our interventions overseas. By invading Iraq and Libya we helped to nurture a culture of bitterness and hatred that inflamed terrorism in the West, he said. This is excuse-making for Islamist terror, plain and simple.

Stop making excuses for Islamist terror


2. Haven't you already voted anyway?

View attachment 1227245

Or is this a Labour "postal votes" thing and you get a few?
The difference is Corbyn spoke out, he spoke out against the war and voted against it. The Blair government made my parents lose all faith in politics, they never thought a Labour government would take the country to war like that. But that's Blair, a very different leader than Corbyn.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
The difference is Corbyn spoke out, he spoke out against the war and voted against it. The Blair government made my parents lose all faith in politics, they never thought a Labour government would take the country to war like that. But that's Blair, a very different leader than Corbyn.
Corbyn also spoke out against Libya and pretty much every other time we've ever had use force including the Falklands where he has spoken of "shared sovereignty" with Argentina.

Great if he thinks Iraq was wrong, what would he have done regarding the Kurds, Marsh Arabs, Saddam Hussein, invasion of Kuwait, use of chemical weapons, torture, what? It seems "nothing." On all of it.

As for Blair he was elected three times. Iraq didn't seem to have stopped that either.
 

MSW

Well-known Member
But that's Blair, a very different leader than Corbyn.
I might be wrong but, is Blair the only Labour Leader who never lost the majority public vote at a GE (Corby has already lost once).

is Blair the only Labour Leader to win three elections on the trot.

my point is that if you go by the majority of public votes (which I would suggest is the only thing that matters in GE) and previous labour leaders successes Blair is the greatest labour leader ever

lot of pressure on Corby as he could become the first labour leader in 30 years to lose two elections
 
Last edited:

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
Couple of things.

1. According to Corbyn the London Bridge killing was down to Iraq. Something that was down to Labour and he was as much a part of as Boris was a member of the Conservatives.

But I guess that bringing Iraq up wasn't jumping on a bandwagon.

Just 48 hours after Usman Khan carried out his grisly, ISIS-inspired stabbing attack, Corbyn was linking it with the ‘war on terror’. In a speech yesterday he said the assault was wrong and wicked etc, etc, but it is also partly our fault, apparently. It happened because of our interventions overseas. By invading Iraq and Libya we helped to nurture a culture of bitterness and hatred that inflamed terrorism in the West, he said. This is excuse-making for Islamist terror, plain and simple.

Stop making excuses for Islamist terror


2. Haven't you already voted anyway?

View attachment 1227245

Or is this a Labour "postal votes" thing and you get a few?
Maybe read the transcript of the actual speech, rather than Brendan O’Neill’s unsurprising summary;

Full text of Jeremy Corbyn’s speech in York - The Labour Party
 

Hampy1972

Well-known Member
El Commrade now blames Trump for Friday terror attack and in other news Katie Price will be hosting the next series of Mastermind.... :)
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
I've read all of it. And?
The parts where he actually explains how the U.K. going into the first Gulf War led to the growth of terrorist attacks;

“You can’t keep people safe on the cheap.

Real security doesn’t only come from strong laws and intelligence, it comes also from effective public services that have the funding they need.

Real security demands more than the correct operational decisions by trained and properly funded professionals. It requires political leadership as well.

For far too long, our country’s leaders have made the wrong calls on our security.

Their mistakes in no way absolve terrorists of blame for their murderous actions.

The blame lies with the terrorists, their funders and recruiters.

But if we are to protect people we must be honest about what threatens our security.

The threat of terrorism cannot and should not be reduced to questions of foreign policy alone.

But too often the actions of successive governments have fuelled, not reduced that threat.

Sixteen years ago, I warned against the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

I said it would set off a spiral of conflict, hate, misery, desperation that will fuel the wars, the conflict, the terrorism and the misery of future generations.

It did, and we are still living with the consequences today.“

But yeah, stick to O’Neill who sees it as making excuses for Islamist terrorists because it couldn’t possibly be our own fault.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
The parts where he actually explains how the U.K. going into the first Gulf War led to the growth of terrorist attacks;
You mean the second Gulf War?

The first Gulf War was in 1991 and liberated Kuwait. The second Gulf War was 2003 and was the invasion/liberation of Iraq.

No idea if he did support the first Gulf War but it looks unlikely.


In fact, he has voted against every military action proposed by the UK government during his 35 years in Parliament.

Before entering Parliament, he spoke out against the Falklands War and cut his political teeth campaigning against the war in Vietnam, a conflict Britain supported without committing troops.


“You can’t keep people safe on the cheap.
He wants cuts to the armed forces. At the end of this video it's the one thing he does want cuts to:


Perhaps it's why some in the armed forces used his image as a target?
But yeah, stick to O’Neill who sees it as making excuses for Islamist terrorists because it couldn’t possibly be our own fault.
But yeah, stick to defending a guy who consistently supports our enemies over our own armed forces.

Here's a poll on arrse forums for 2017. It's an unofficial forum for the army/armed forces. Why does he seem so unpopular with our armed forces?

1575323288475.png
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
You mean the second Gulf War?

The first Gulf War was in 1991 and liberated Kuwait. The second Gulf War was 2003 and was the invasion/liberation of Iraq.

No idea if he did support the first Gulf War but it looks unlikely.


In fact, he has voted against every military action proposed by the UK government during his 35 years in Parliament.

Before entering Parliament, he spoke out against the Falklands War and cut his political teeth campaigning against the war in Vietnam, a conflict Britain supported without committing troops.



He wants cuts to the armed forces. At the end of this video it's the one thing he does want cuts to:


Perhaps it's why some in the armed forces used his image as a target?

But yeah, stick to defending a guy who consistently supports our enemies over our own armed forces.

Here's a poll on arrse forums for 2017. It's an unofficial forum for the army/armed forces. Why does he seem so unpopular with our armed forces?

View attachment 1227371
Apologies, the second Gulf War.

It’s not really surprising that someone who’s spent their political life campaigning against wars isn’t a poster boy for the armed forces is it. As for his support on another random forum, of ex armed forces, again it’s hardly shocking.

I was highlighting the actual transcript of his speech, in comparison to O’Neill’s unsurprising summary.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
Apologies, the second Gulf War.

It’s not really surprising that someone who’s spent their political life campaigning against wars isn’t a poster boy for the armed forces is it. As for his support on another random forum, of ex armed forces, again it’s hardly shocking.

I was highlighting the actual transcript of his speech, in comparison to O’Neill’s unsurprising summary.
I note that politicising London Bridge isn't a problem for him. Again. Latest video:


1575325667526.png
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
I agree. No politician should be trying to gain political favour on the back of a terrorist attack. All disgraceful.
Please don't post things where I agree with you, it gives me a raging inner conflict.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
If you are on twitter this is trending.

1575328462535.png


1575328502520.png


1575328564639.png


Etc. Find the rest yourself.
 

gizlaroc

Well-known Member
The guy was killed whilst actively trying to prevent jihadists roaming around stabbing people, by rehabilitating/de-radicalising them. Sadly, it clearly didn’t work for this terrorist but at least he tried.
I'm a firm believer of reform, but when it comes to Jihadi extremists anyone who thinks there is reform is extremely naive.


It’s not really surprising that someone who’s spent their political life campaigning against wars isn’t a poster boy for the armed forces is it. As for his support on another random forum, of ex armed forces, again it’s hardly shocking.

If you go into the armed forces, the one person who you want to know has your back, is you leader.
Having a PM in charge who you think could sell you down the river must be an extremely scary thought thought for those in the forces.
And it should be a scary thought for any UK citizen.
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
I'm a firm believer of reform, but when it comes to Jihadi extremists anyone who thinks there is reform is extremely naive.





If you go into the armed forces, the one person who you want to know has your back, is you leader.
Having a PM in charge who you think could sell you down the river must be an extremely scary thought thought for those in the forces.
And it should be a scary thought for any UK citizen.
At the risk of being accused of deflection, do you truly believe that Johnson would have anyone else’s but his own back in any kind of crisis? This is the problem currently, all options are terrible.

Edit - Look at his response over the weekend. An atrocious act is committed in our Capital City, one he was Mayor of twice and, rather than stand up and lead his country and show strength, he spent the weekend pointing at something a Government did 10 years’ ago to deflect blame and cover his own back.
 

mcbainne

Well-known Member
The NHS has nothing to do with disgusting people intent on slaughtering innocent people in the street in the name of religion.
Why would it even enter your head to bring the NHS into this sort of issue? Unless it's some cheap point scoring exersise?

BTW it's noted you ignored my question to you previously. Speaks volumes. :rolleyes:
In the respect that both are topics that should be discussed and decided upon in a non partisan way with the politics removed as both are issues that affect all people in the country regardless of who you are

I'm sorry next time i'll reply in a way that's far easier for you to understand, i do have crayons

What question did i mess?
 

mcbainne

Well-known Member
Cumbucket Becrow says the Brexit is the biggest political blunder ever and he is up for a 2nd ref.

Why should we have a 2nd ref when you haven't even honoured the result of the 1st one?

- Some advice Mr Becrow, if I was you, keep a eye on what your missus on what she gets up too and leave politics to someone who knows what they're talking about. :)
Is that person you? :laugh:
 

mcbainne

Well-known Member
Was just reading an article on the chef that fought Khan on London Bridge, despite suffering knife wounds he battled him until the armed police pulled him off prior to shooting the terrorist. He then calmly went back to cleaning glasses in Fishmongers Hall. What a hero

Oh and he's Polish, earning less that the minimum threshold the Tories want to introduce to assure settled status in the country. Pesky EU migrants coming here saving lives

 

Hampy1972

Well-known Member

Hampy1972

Well-known Member
Looking at the above comments, looks like you miss a leader like Maggie....
Now, have we all shifted too far to the centre left that is she was alive today would be deemed too far to the right?
When it came to defense of this great nation, she took no middle ground, smashed everyone that tried to undermine us and I would imagine her line on *the virus* currently among us which Farage named the other night.

You want to be feel safe walking the streets, you want your family to feel safe and you want to come home after a day's work but you also want a liberal, snowflake, happy, tree hugging world too..
You CAN'T have both!

Something she understood very well......
 

Bigfingers

Distinguished Member
In the respect that both are topics that should be discussed and decided upon in a non partisan way with the politics removed as both are issues that affect all people in the country regardless of who you are

I'm sorry next time i'll reply in a way that's far easier for you to understand, i do have crayons

What question did i mess?
Post #3507

I'm well aware what your transparent attempt was.

Resorting to personal insults I see. It's about your level, so no surprise there.
 

Trending threads

Latest News

Netflix UK free trials come to an end
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sony update brings AirPlay 2 and Dolby Atmos support to select TVs
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Cleer FLOW II headphones get Google Assistant
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Denon introduces DHT-S216 All-in-One soundbar
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom