Yeah, let’s just keep getting rid of the PM whenever they make a mistake. After all, doing that works so well with football managers…
Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Yeah, let’s just keep getting rid of the PM whenever they make a mistake. After all, doing that works so well with football managers…
I think Israel's behaviour is certainly as terrible and systematic as the Nazi's. It has become a war against Islam and one carried out without the respect to all human life. Absolutely dreadful. There are no excuses.
HIGNFY
"King Charles will give a speech to the US Congress today saying “time and again, our two countries have always found ways to come together”, although not always for the best."
"King Charles will give a speech to the US Congress today saying “time and again, our two countries have always found ways to come together”, although not always for the best."
You must log in or register to see images
Ah yes the totally impartial UN. Always a good source of the truth.
"The idea of a global summit to discuss the promotion of human rights being led by a representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran – a country responsible for some of the worst human-rights abuses on the planet – truly beggars belief. Bahreini presumably has the official blessing of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei – a head of state who oversees a regime of deadly brutality against its own citizens."
Why is the UN making excuses for Hamas?
António Guterres’s Israel-bashing is out of control.
www.spiked-online.com
And Amnesty International and the so called scholars.
"This revisionism has now spread far beyond the JGR, of course. Amnesty International, in its December 2024 report, claims that current genocide case law provides ‘an overly cramped interpretation’. It’s a sentiment echoed by Ireland’s deputy prime minister, who at the end last year called for the International Court of Justice to expand its ‘narrow interpretation’ of genocide to cover Israeli actions. Ireland has pushed, in particular, for the ICJ to drop the ‘only reasonable inference’ test of genocidal intent. This is the equivalent of an accuser changing the definition of a crime to fit the accused."
And Ireland
Last edited:
It just isn’t remotely close. It’s mental how gaslit people have been by this nonsense.
And before Starmer , there were 4 Conservatives .
I'm afraid you've come across one of our more extreme posters. Most on here are anti Israeli as they like to call themselves, thinking it gives them some sort of screen to hide behind.
Anti-Israel is fine. Dumb but fine. Equating with the actual Nazis is just ******ed and shows how over-invested people with no skin in the game are for a small war.
Hang on a minute, that's not true at all. What I've read is that most people have balanced views and part of that is criticising Israel's part in all this. There are some opinions that I think are a bit extreme but the majority of people on here are not anti Israeli.
Yeah, why should the country want to know about whether the PM lied about getting round a security vetting system to install his mate?
A mate who's been sacked twice (?) before for dubious dishonest behaviour and gets put into the most important diplomatic post going. A mate who has business interests with China, Russia and Qatar and has been found to have discussed confidential government affairs with Epstein.
How tiresome having to listen to all that. Time to move on.
Think you should go and re read some historic posts. If you are critical of Israel's part in all this you are hardly balanced. Unless you can show me some (other than mine) posts backing Israel, I stand by what I said.
Why? Both sides can be criticised for their conduct. Israel are not blameless in all of this.
Because most of the blame is going in Israel's direction, and that's not a balanced view. If people want to criticise Israel over this war, then fine that's their opinion (I think they're wrong) but it's not balanced.
What a short memory you have. No he didn't resign after he was found to have broken the law. Starmer hasn't been made to look good but he has nowhere near broken the law here, though you can question his judgement. Replacement of a PM would impact the markets which is the last thing we need. Can you see an obvious replacement, I can't.
I really don't get this opinion. I don't think anyone is saying that Johnson was a better PM. I don't think anyone is even saying the last government was better than this one. Why is he constantly mentioned when Starmer gets criticism? Johnson was dumped 4 years ago, Starmer is the current PM and should be judged on that alone. At the moment he comes across as dishonest, clueless and weak.
The comparison with Johnson seem to be saying if Johnson was incompetent then it's OK for Starmer to be as well.
Surely if Johnson was all the things he is accused of being (probably was) then surely you would want Starmer to be much better, and not used as a comparison to excuse his dishonesty.
It's not the law, it's the ministerial code. Johnson resigned (eventually) after breaching the code when his cabinet ministers started resigning. If Starmer has lied or intentionally misled MP's he will have broken it too.
Not even anti Israel. Just anti the indiscriminate massacre of civilians, and the complete contempt for human life shown by the current government of Israel (and the USA for that matter).
Though it does appear that an awful lot of Israelis regard all Arabs as somehow less than human. And I’m very much against that.
This is a slightly odd comment, IAOG. You're saying that nobody that has any criticism of Israel's current standing with regard to the war against Iran/Palestine/Lebanon can't be balanced? That in itself is a slightly hypocritical standpoint.