Tommy two names and Muskrat snr plus other nonentity traitors.
Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
There's nothing like demonstrating your "patriotism" by attending a country which is in a proxy war with your own. Says everything about the modern far right.
I can appreciate the appeal of increasing defence expenditure but the lead in period for equipment like the aircraft carriers and the armoured personnel vehicle have been over budget, delivered late and there are questions about fitness for purpose. We have rarely got value for money with military expenditure.
The talk about increasing percentage of GDP on defence seems sensible on the face of things but it traditionally takes so long to procure that the equipment often arrives late and no longer suitable for the intended role. Expenditure on drones seems to make sense but do we really know how long Russian will remain a threat. A date of 2030 has been mooted but Putin will be 77 by then and there is no guarantee he will last that long. The situation in Russia in 2030 could be radically different. I appreciate that there is a risk there yet the absence of a regime change by that time seems really unlikely. No Trump and no Putin in 2030 will make the world a much safer place. We are spending for a future we cannot predict. It would be more sensible to spend the money on issues like climate change and managing this as it is something we know will happen. We need to spend money on green tech and not weapons.
The talk about increasing percentage of GDP on defence seems sensible on the face of things but it traditionally takes so long to procure that the equipment often arrives late and no longer suitable for the intended role. Expenditure on drones seems to make sense but do we really know how long Russian will remain a threat. A date of 2030 has been mooted but Putin will be 77 by then and there is no guarantee he will last that long. The situation in Russia in 2030 could be radically different. I appreciate that there is a risk there yet the absence of a regime change by that time seems really unlikely. No Trump and no Putin in 2030 will make the world a much safer place. We are spending for a future we cannot predict. It would be more sensible to spend the money on issues like climate change and managing this as it is something we know will happen. We need to spend money on green tech and not weapons.
Intrigued to see mention of Farage being in deep trouble with the £5 million donation and there is now talk of a potential by-election in Clacton. Being reported by "The I."
If he’s suspended for 10 days or more, I think that automatically triggers a bi-election, but he’s not prevented from standing again himself
It will be fascinating as I wonder how much the appearance of Burnham on the scene would make voters in Clacton decide not to re-elect the self aggrandising Nigel Farage. I can see this issue blowing up in the next few weeks. Burnham will be more ruthless with Farage than Starmer. This does not seem as likely as it seems to me. I can see Parliament being not only very disturbed by the late disclosure of the donation but also by some of his subsequent comments. He is not going to get away with this.
Unless they go nuclear, how much of a threat is Russia, in a conventional war?
Ukraine has exposed their military capabilities as being not good enough to overcome them, plus they are destroying so much of the Russian military and oil industry, so how would Russia contend with a war with NATO, even without the Americans?
Drones are the way to go instead of so many traditional ground forces .
It’s a different mind set , but we better get our heads around it if we ever need to fight a modern war .
It’s a different mind set , but we better get our heads around it if we ever need to fight a modern war .
I saw a video on YouTube, a few months ago, which said that our navy had a laser weapon for bringing down drones, with each “shot” costing as little as 50p, plus an endless number of shots available.
Trouble is I haven’t got a clue if the video was truth or bullshit.
It's been reported on a number of sources including this https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news/2025/november/20/20251120-dragonfire-trials Besides that laser bullets don't make as good a lyric as rubber bullets.
Ex navy man over the road still keeps tabs on what’s going on , and he said they did a mock battle were a handful of the enemy using drones , obliterated a mass of nato land troops ( inc tanks etc ) .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clye9zn0y1ro
Smash the gangs! Or, you know, just let them come and live here.
Smash the gangs! Or, you know, just let them come and live here.
Interesting that the article suggests criminal records would have been accessible prior to Brexit which has made this more diffucult. Post Brexit, we have no idea which immigrants have served sentences in Europe.
There has been quite a lot in the news today about prison sentences with the case of the young girls who were raped in Fordingbridge and the member of the grooming gang in Rochdale being released early. I was quite intrigued by the fact that Radio 4 bridged these news stories with a third feature about how the internet and social media is having a negative effect on the behaviour of children.
I usually enjoy Radio 4 news but today I felt that there were wider issues they did not consider. I am sceptical if the Fordingbridge incident could have happened without the influence of the internet and wish the reporter had made more of the 13 year old who escaped the custodial sentence had filmed and posted the content on line of one of the attacks. In my opinion, more should have been made of this fact.
I also feel that another, broader issue was over-looked and concerns the way society behaved. Why did the spouses of the grooming gang victims not say anything and what was the response of the parents of the two youths who have been sentenced? It also crossed my mind that the parents of the two girls could have prevented their daughters meeting up with the young lads. The fact that one of the boys had an IQ amongst the lowest 1% in the country also raised alarm bells for me. I just think that there is a broader issue here with society which has been facilitated by social media use, whether it is the Asian blokes being able to exploit and transport young girls across the NW or teenagers thinking it is not only ok to rape, but to film and post the content on line.
If the BBC had been savvy, all three news articles could have been linked in some way. I appreciate that there are other issues at play here such as unacceptable cultural attitudes, parental control and the identification of schools kids who show signs of abnormal behaviour but these have all be made possible by social media. The cases are all tragic yet the BBC should have considered the wider malaise in society and looked at the factors driving this. I then think that society starts to look at how influencers such as Andrew Tate are responsible for this and efforts made to ensure that they are swiftly prosecuted. I understand that the Asian gang in Rochdale will have been unlikely to have been influenced directly by Tate yet it is all part of a broader mix which goes beyond the mantra of making the streets safe for women. I think the bigger issue is that it now appears acceptable for men not to respect women and that, in the hands of boys with low IQS, this will have disastrous consequence.
Just felt that PM missed a big opportunity this afternoon to look at the broader culture of things.
I usually enjoy Radio 4 news but today I felt that there were wider issues they did not consider. I am sceptical if the Fordingbridge incident could have happened without the influence of the internet and wish the reporter had made more of the 13 year old who escaped the custodial sentence had filmed and posted the content on line of one of the attacks. In my opinion, more should have been made of this fact.
I also feel that another, broader issue was over-looked and concerns the way society behaved. Why did the spouses of the grooming gang victims not say anything and what was the response of the parents of the two youths who have been sentenced? It also crossed my mind that the parents of the two girls could have prevented their daughters meeting up with the young lads. The fact that one of the boys had an IQ amongst the lowest 1% in the country also raised alarm bells for me. I just think that there is a broader issue here with society which has been facilitated by social media use, whether it is the Asian blokes being able to exploit and transport young girls across the NW or teenagers thinking it is not only ok to rape, but to film and post the content on line.
If the BBC had been savvy, all three news articles could have been linked in some way. I appreciate that there are other issues at play here such as unacceptable cultural attitudes, parental control and the identification of schools kids who show signs of abnormal behaviour but these have all be made possible by social media. The cases are all tragic yet the BBC should have considered the wider malaise in society and looked at the factors driving this. I then think that society starts to look at how influencers such as Andrew Tate are responsible for this and efforts made to ensure that they are swiftly prosecuted. I understand that the Asian gang in Rochdale will have been unlikely to have been influenced directly by Tate yet it is all part of a broader mix which goes beyond the mantra of making the streets safe for women. I think the bigger issue is that it now appears acceptable for men not to respect women and that, in the hands of boys with low IQS, this will have disastrous consequence.
Just felt that PM missed a big opportunity this afternoon to look at the broader culture of things.
HIGNFY
"£5m from a crypto billionaire and £1/4m for advertising gold bullion have really helped Nigel Farage in his fight for the little guy against the establishment elites."
"£5m from a crypto billionaire and £1/4m for advertising gold bullion have really helped Nigel Farage in his fight for the little guy against the establishment elites."
You must log in or register to see images
Unfortunately anything where non-white people are construed to be doing something unacceptable will result in far right protests. There have been so many issues where you can see protests taking place prompted by media attention. These kind of things are sadly inevitable in this country. You can almost predict how things will pan out in the next few weeks. Someone will find out where the Pakistani bloke who was released from prison this week is hiding and this will be broadcast on social media as soon as they will find out. There will be mass protests when he is discovered. You know that the murderer of Henry Novak will not get protection in prison. I am surprised that nothing has happened in Leicester now that the people trafficker has been identified on the BBC. (But I bet many of the people protesting will have used stores like his to buy vapes, etc.)
Twenty years ago people would be disgusted by the actions of these three criminals but this is not enough these days and some people think is is appropriate to step outside of the law and make their opinions felt. It is obvious that the accommodation in Oxford will be identified for protesters and many people, whilst agreeing with their arguments, will not be happy with this happening on their doorstep. In the past, I feel people were happier to let the courts / law take action yet I think the erosion of confidence in the law has exacerbated the problem.
The situation would be better if the police, social workers, immigration offers, etc were properly supported by the various governments so they could get on a do the job. Council workers are unvalued and under paid whilst there are too many bad apples in the police for the public to have confidence in the constabulary. Unfortunately, people do not want to pay for these services at the level they are required and are happy to use business which employ illegal labour and feed the appetite for unskilled, immigrant labour. The fact that everyone has mobile phones ensures that recruitment is made easier and can go under the radar , by-passing the bureaucracy. Immigration and importing criminality would have been better prior to Brexit. It amazes me that so few could not see this in 2016 and that the people most affected and exercised by the issue are the ones most likely to have supported Farage. There are not enough benefits complying with the system and fair decisions are often seen to be arbitrary. If people could experience impartiality, fairness and have proved to them that criminals are not benefitting, I do feel there would be absolutely no need for gammons to be on the streets protesting.
I think that we should maybe start looking at a meritocracy as opposed to letting capitalism run things down to the last common denominator. There is a problem which needs to be fixed and the Right are not the solution to do this. We are now seeing Thatcher's opening of the markets in the 1980s produce a devastating social impact. People object to paying tax and then grumble when the services we need are no longer affordable. The markets have been allowed to run amok so that only affluent areas, town, regions and countries remain viable. Those areas which fall outside off being viable seem to encourage the supporters of Farage. This is why I feel Burnham needs to make so very drastic decisions about redistribution across the regions and ensure that the level of services we require are maintained regardless of what they cost. If he makes good on his words, it will be a great thing and also make Farage irrelevant.
Twenty years ago people would be disgusted by the actions of these three criminals but this is not enough these days and some people think is is appropriate to step outside of the law and make their opinions felt. It is obvious that the accommodation in Oxford will be identified for protesters and many people, whilst agreeing with their arguments, will not be happy with this happening on their doorstep. In the past, I feel people were happier to let the courts / law take action yet I think the erosion of confidence in the law has exacerbated the problem.
The situation would be better if the police, social workers, immigration offers, etc were properly supported by the various governments so they could get on a do the job. Council workers are unvalued and under paid whilst there are too many bad apples in the police for the public to have confidence in the constabulary. Unfortunately, people do not want to pay for these services at the level they are required and are happy to use business which employ illegal labour and feed the appetite for unskilled, immigrant labour. The fact that everyone has mobile phones ensures that recruitment is made easier and can go under the radar , by-passing the bureaucracy. Immigration and importing criminality would have been better prior to Brexit. It amazes me that so few could not see this in 2016 and that the people most affected and exercised by the issue are the ones most likely to have supported Farage. There are not enough benefits complying with the system and fair decisions are often seen to be arbitrary. If people could experience impartiality, fairness and have proved to them that criminals are not benefitting, I do feel there would be absolutely no need for gammons to be on the streets protesting.
I think that we should maybe start looking at a meritocracy as opposed to letting capitalism run things down to the last common denominator. There is a problem which needs to be fixed and the Right are not the solution to do this. We are now seeing Thatcher's opening of the markets in the 1980s produce a devastating social impact. People object to paying tax and then grumble when the services we need are no longer affordable. The markets have been allowed to run amok so that only affluent areas, town, regions and countries remain viable. Those areas which fall outside off being viable seem to encourage the supporters of Farage. This is why I feel Burnham needs to make so very drastic decisions about redistribution across the regions and ensure that the level of services we require are maintained regardless of what they cost. If he makes good on his words, it will be a great thing and also make Farage irrelevant.
As someone who used to work in the NVQ industry, I’m interested in seeing what Burnham does about apprenticeships.
He has mentioned that 16-18 year olds should have the opportunity of being given an employment opportunity to achieve a workplace based qualification, instead of having to go college and pursue further academic qualifications, that they aren’t suited to.
I still haven’t forgiven the Blair regime for changing the apprenticeship programme to include key skills, in 2000.
In a nutshell, they decided that an apprentice could only achieve a full qualification if they either already had GCSE grade C (or better) in Maths and English, or if they achieved the equivalent in key skills.
Their thought process was that anyone wanting to become an apprentice, without the C grades, would then be forced to do the key skills and improve their education standards.
What they didn’t consider was that Training Companies, that were the “middlemen” in the funding process, weren’t set up to deliver the education that umpteen years at school had failed to deliver.
The nett result was that Training Companies stopped accepting apprenticeship applications from lads/lasses who didn’t already have the necessary C grades, thus shutting the door on the school leaver group, who traditionally went into manual labour jobs, stopping them from getting a trade that many had set their hearts on.
Even lads/lasses who were guaranteed a job in a family business were being rejected for official training, so although they could still work and learn on the job, they were being denied the opportunity to attain the certification that supported their abilities.
TBH, I don’t know if the system has changed since I stopped working in the industry, but I genuinely hope that the apprenticeship he has in mind is purely about the trade and doesn’t involve further academic training that will prevent successful outcomes for the young person.
He has mentioned that 16-18 year olds should have the opportunity of being given an employment opportunity to achieve a workplace based qualification, instead of having to go college and pursue further academic qualifications, that they aren’t suited to.
I still haven’t forgiven the Blair regime for changing the apprenticeship programme to include key skills, in 2000.
In a nutshell, they decided that an apprentice could only achieve a full qualification if they either already had GCSE grade C (or better) in Maths and English, or if they achieved the equivalent in key skills.
Their thought process was that anyone wanting to become an apprentice, without the C grades, would then be forced to do the key skills and improve their education standards.
What they didn’t consider was that Training Companies, that were the “middlemen” in the funding process, weren’t set up to deliver the education that umpteen years at school had failed to deliver.
The nett result was that Training Companies stopped accepting apprenticeship applications from lads/lasses who didn’t already have the necessary C grades, thus shutting the door on the school leaver group, who traditionally went into manual labour jobs, stopping them from getting a trade that many had set their hearts on.
Even lads/lasses who were guaranteed a job in a family business were being rejected for official training, so although they could still work and learn on the job, they were being denied the opportunity to attain the certification that supported their abilities.
TBH, I don’t know if the system has changed since I stopped working in the industry, but I genuinely hope that the apprenticeship he has in mind is purely about the trade and doesn’t involve further academic training that will prevent successful outcomes for the young person.
I did an apprenticeship at the RAE in Farnborough in the sixties with day release for a city and guilds course leading to a HND. There were some really skillful craftsmen passing on their knowledge, trades don't get the recognition they deserve.
I agree with you about apprenticeships because in simplistic terms they filled the large educational gap between non skilled and university. And at a later date if they felt they could achieve better academic qualifications that could also be possible.
The apprenticeship route suited this group of youngsters and at the same time benefitted the country by supplying services for homes and industry, but therein lies the problem. The majority of apprenticeships and skilled manual worker jobs were in industry, but we have very little manufacturing these days. Apart from the building industry it has long since puzzled me as to where the people who would have worked in manufacturing are employed now. If you look at Southampton as an example, nearly all of the major employers have closed their factories. Apart from the loss of both skilled and non skilled jobs, apprenticeships went with them.
So as much as Burnham has mentioned apprenticeships I don't know where they will be or in enough numbers that will benefit youngsters and the country in general. I hope he can because we seem to be raising a country of young people without aspirations or even hope for their future.