Off Topic Political Debate

If that was personal then so was what you said to Yorkie. With consistency of approach like that I am tempted to ask if you and Brendan Rodgers are related...

 

Point 1 RE: Bin Laden:
If you take his words in context, Corbyn has the radical idea that people should be tried for their crimes rather than shot for them. Furthermore, his words were (in context) describing how the death of Bin Laden has created something of a 'shuffle of power' in the Middle East that potentially has caused more harm than good.

Point 2 RE: Hezbollah/Hamas:
Again, taking context into account and not just sensationalist soundbites, he also thinks that having discussions with people that you disagree with to solve long-term problems is a sensible course of action.

Point 3 RE: Nuclear Defences:
Once again, to contextualise his opinion: he appears to agree that Trident is a creaking drain on the British economy, not to mention a "disaster waiting to happen", according to those who work with it:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-32771925

Clearly this madman must be stopped before he kills us all!


All that said, it was mud-slinging that helped the Tories beat Ed Miliband. They'll do it all the time, every time. It will not surprise me if it works again.

 

I can fully understand why you lefties are extremely embarrassed by recent events.

 

Not me - parties pull themselves apart and regroup to become stronger further down the line. As a supporter of a party who elected Ian Duncan Smith I thought you would understand that

 

As a moderator you should be above petty insults.

 

I'm not a moderator

 

about time you changed your strap line then.

 

I can't - but it's all in hand.

 

Well there is the best part of five years for JC to make his mark, or judging by some of the comments seen today be removed by his own party. The real Left in France has been pushed aside by the socialist government, but they continue to snipe from the sidelines. and every now and again refuse to give their support to a government that they are supposed to be a part of. The result is that strange procedural measures have to be taken to get legislation through. The other effect is that some see the far right FN as an alternative, while all the time the Unions hold the country to ransom with their blockades.
Whatever happens throughout Europe the left have not shown themselves too good at managing economies within the modern world. Too many politicians have never worked outside the government bubbles and show up an idealist approach that is not compatible with running a countries economy. At least the current French prime minister has some knowledge of the outside world, but finds it very difficult to get the country to move in a way to get them out of their current woes.

 

N

What about his plans for massive spending and increases in taxation? Nationalising major industries? More and more state controls? More government because the masses cannot be trusted to think and act for themselves.
Do you really believe that mudslinging caused the downfall of Milliband? Not because the electorate had no trust of him and Team Labour. For years they rattled on about we should be spending our way out of the recession, then rattled on and on about Hard Working Families. It did not need any mudslinging as they had no credibility.
I rarely buy a newspaper as I have little spare time to read one, but when I do it is The Independent on a Saturday - yes that well known Tory rag!

 

It's funny WY my old man always bought the Telegraph and, despite my political preferences, I still buy it as I like the reporting style, the sport and the crosswords!

 

That doesn't make sense. Why should they pay any tax? It is not in their interest or the interest of their shareholders. The logic of corporate responsibility is to find any way possible to avoid paying tax. Corporations are neither charities or imbued with any social or environmental requirements. They will only take these things on board if they result in increased profits. The current international trade agreements are framed in such a way that governments will lose what little control they currently have over these entities. This is why it is totally irrelevant who leads a political party. Political parties are structured to handle political realities that have passed. Arguments about which party is best to run a country is about as relevant in today's political economy as arguments about tithes to the church. The nation state that exists today only truly arrived in the 18th century. It is now on its way out. Power structures are shifting. The world is not run on 'shoulds' so don't expect significant tax revenues from corporations. It is only those without power who will pay tax, and that is only because governments of whatever political party need to justify their existence. It is certainly becoming less because they can actually do anything.

So Superhorns, don't worry about Corbyn implementing his policies. He won't be allowed to.

 

As I understand it W_Y the Tories only got 24% of the vote of the British Electorate. So most of us didn't vote for them.

I would really welcome discussion here that wasn't the Tories are right and Labour are wrong version.

 

The fact that Corbyn will not be allowed to implement his damaging policies is one of the benefits of international finance. The UK has worked hard over the last few years to create a business friendly environment which has secured us the majority of the EU's inward investment. This has obviously been a factor in why our employment figures compare favourably with other countries.

If there was even a whiff of Corbyn's cronies obtaining any influence in the UK it would result in foreign investment drying up and and a rise in the cost of servicing our national debt. UK companies would also hold back on investment or worse still invest abroad.

Long gone are the days of Wilson's currency controls which failed miserably. It is right that investors around the world can choose which place they want to invest in, it is up to each country to decide whether to adjust their fiscal policies to compete or not.

 

We still have people here who want Ísland to join the European union. That will open our island to many things they can or refuse not understand.

And I see your migrants are causing trouble already. Can anyone explain why these people are nearly all fit young men of a military age with good mobile telephones and who are happy to discard food and drink offered to them? Would a refugee be happy for any help? This is not the face of a refugee crisis this is an invasion.

please log in to view this image

 

My belief is that politicians around the world have been running to catch up with the ever changing life we lead. At one time there would have been dozens of farm workers out in the fields at this time of year, rather than one man with a huge machine. The car factories would have employed thousands who have lost their jobs to robots. Even La Poste and the Royal Mail would have been busy handling letters that are now sent electronically. This means huge change to the economic structures that have been in place for years and the pace of that change is ever increasing.
To think that the old versions of party politics can be used in this modern world seems odd to say the least. A new way forward has to be constantly sought, and there will be plenty of falls along the way. As much as some would like to see people walking to their close at hand employment, living off what they can produce for their own family, it is of an age gone by. There are daily checks on how one country is managing to find the solutions compared to another in the way of currency exchange rates. To want to go back in time to policies that didn't work the first time round seems wrong to me, new and different policies should be put forward. Maybe others feel the same, which is why extreme parties of both the left and the right appear to be attractive. It is only when you delve deeper that you find the flaws with their messages. A new way will emerge eventually, but it will be from the middle ground where basic management of the economy is more important than ideology.

 

A recent report (admittedly the Daiy Mail!!) claims 2 in every 100 of these migrants may be ISIS. Even if this is a wildly pessimistic number it is very worrying. The Shrengen agreement was a ridiculous political conception.

 

If I am not very much mistaken the picture here is of a Salafisten demo in Germany - this has nothing to do with refugees whatsoever. They actually look a rather mixed bunch here, and what is especially problematic is that there are around 100,000 christian converts to Islam in Germany (this figure is not markedly different from other western European countries). One of their leading preachers is Pierre Vogel, born in Cologne and from a Roman Catholic background. It appears that from the margins of western society (those that some people call losers) Islam has a special attraction - particularly the radical version.

 

I think whatever the source of Ak's photo, and in all likelyhood it is another case of getting a picture to fit a story - something journalists never do (right?), there is a great worry that the sheer numbers arriving in Europe will contain certain individuals who definately are not refugees or even economic migrants, but those intent on causing trouble. Even the prime minister of Lebanon told David Cameron this in their meeting.

There is already anecdotal talk of a black market in Syrian passports and of conversions to Christianity to aid asylum applications; where conversion is a crime punishable by death in Islam, false conversion to aid the spread the faith is not.

One question is why is Saudi Arabia giving German huge amounts of money to build mosques when this money could be used to help the real refugees held in camps in southern Syria, Jordan and Lebanon? Google "saudi arabia german mosques" and just see what appears.

 

David Cameron seems to be the only sensible western leader trying to encourage these migrants to stay on their own continent. I agree more help is needed to create safe havens within the countries listed above.