pandarilla Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Corbyn being mauled by his own party here. (Debate live on BBC news channel) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Just now, pandarilla said: Corbyn being mauled by his own party here. (Debate live on BBC news channel) Was just away post this,its an absolute disgrace,basically they are just doing it because its corbyn,the sooner the labour party sorts its self out corbyn in /out the better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakedee Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Corbyn being mauled by his own party here. (Debate live on BBC news channel) The quicker these so called labour mp's are deselected, the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 This is horrible to watch.Corbyn is drowning here - but it's entirely caused by his own party. Caroline Lucas just white knighted him, trying at least to make a decent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 North Korea is a complete red herring (at the moment anyway). They may or may not have warheads, but they can't deliver them. Their missiles implode after about 100 miles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortar Bored Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Nuclear deterrent ffs.It's 2016 not 1962. Stop it, with your year of birth shite! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 The PLP is an absolute disgrace, trying to shootdown Corbyn at every turn. Sooner they are all deselected the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Listen to these fuds greeting about , it's a dangerous world , the NPT was signed in 1968 ffs just think of the state of the world in that period . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 The PLP is an absolute disgrace, trying to shootdown Corbyn at every turn. Sooner they are all deselected the better. Classless fucks, every one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Not that I support the renewal of trident but Corbyn is voting against his own parties democratically decided position, which as a leader who is hanging on based purely on being democratically elected by members, is hypocritical to say the least. This is, in a nutshell, why he shouldn't be leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Not that I support the renewal of trident but Corbyn is voting against his own parties democratically decided position, which as a leader who is hanging on based purely on being democratically elected by members, is hypocritical to say the least. This is, in a nutshell, why he shouldn't be leader. And what would you be accusing him of if he was voting against his beliefs? You'd be calling him a hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Corbyn is getting unrelenting abuse from his own benches - good.After the leadership vote, video of this and other debates can be shown as reason for kicking the c***s out of the party, and out off their cushy jobs. I would expect any CLP to deselect these scum at the earliest opportunity.Oh, and too reply to GD's earlier request - I'm a Party member, and have been against nuclear weapons - any nuclear weapons - since childhood. The idea that if we're going down we can take the world with us has never appealed, in all honesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakedee Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Not that I support the renewal of trident but Corbyn is voting against his own parties democratically decided position, which as a leader who is hanging on based purely on being democratically elected by members, is hypocritical to say the least. This is, in a nutshell, why he shouldn't be leader. So a democratically elected leader should stand down because he is against a democratically decided position,no wonder the Labour party is in such a mess.Maybe previous leaders of this party influenced the way this democratically decided position was reached, and Corbyn now wants to try and take a different direction.Give him time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Corbyn is getting unrelenting abuse from his own benches - good.After the leadership vote, video of this and other debates can be shown as reason for kicking the c***s out of the party, and out off their cushy jobs. I would expect any CLP to deselect these scum at the earliest opportunity.Oh, and too reply to GD's earlier request - I'm a Party member, and have been against nuclear weapons - any nuclear weapons - since childhood. The idea that if we're going down we can take the world with us has never appealed, in all honesty. Caroline Flint just argued that by having nuclear weapons, we were able to get other smaller countries to get rid of theirs.Think about that for a wee second. She's saying we need new nuclear weapons so that we can tell other countries not to build new weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Mhairi Black's use of "hee haw" was outstanding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 6 hours ago, jmothecat said: a leader who is hanging on based purely on being democratically elected by members Eh... the same way it works for every party then? On another note. May saying she was perfectly prepared to push the button if it meant the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children was nothing short of chilling. How anybody can suggest they feel "safer" under her leadership beggars belief. What was that daft old lady all about on BBC Scotland earlier when she thought the renewal of Trident was "a great thing"? Great?! ****ing seriously?! I suppose it's great for old people like her with 6 months left on their clock. Determined to take the world with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooky Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 On another note. May saying she was perfectly prepared to push the button if it meant the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children was nothing short of chilling. How anybody can suggest they feel "safer" under her leadership beggars belief. If you support retaining our nuclear deterrent, you're not going to say you'd never use it. Then it's just fucking pointless! Of course you need to say that you would be prepared to use it if the situation arose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 8 minutes ago, Sooky said: If you support retaining our nuclear deterrent, you're not going to say you'd never use it. Then it's just fucking pointless! Of course you need to say that you would be prepared to use it if the situation arose. To achieve what? The only people that would be crazy enough to launch nuclear weapons would be those who have no fear of dying themselves. If they ever fell into the hands of a group that would actually be capable of launching them, then they would go ahead and do it anyway. As for deterring the likes of Russia, North Korea and any other country that currently harbours these weapons. It's nothing more than a political game. A very costly one. None of these countries would ever launch, because they're all using it as a deterrent. If they weren't. Then they would be crazy enough to fire them anyway, despite any other countries nuclear capabilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 10 minutes ago, Sooky said: If you support retaining our nuclear deterrent, you're not going to say you'd never use it. Then it's just fucking pointless! Of course you need to say that you would be prepared to use it if the situation arose. If I understand the Tory position correctly, we will only use the nukes if we are nuked by an enemy first. That means that we only have to worry about being attacked by 8 other nations. It's pretty unlikely that France or the USA will attack us. Russia & China could absolutely destroy the UK with their 1st strike capability - any of our missiles that got through would barely make a dent. I'm not aware of any reason why India or Pakistan would attack us - their weapons are pointed at each other. Is there any realistic scenario where we would individually be at war with israel without the USA and/or Russia (with their huge nuclear arsenals) being involved too? That leaves North Korea. Firstly, they don't have a delivery system that could hit the UK. Secondly, why would they pick us first? Tell me again how spunking billions on Trident deters any of these major military threats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Stubbs Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 5 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said: If I understand the Tory position correctly, we will only use the nukes if we are nuked by an enemy first. That means that we only have to worry about being attacked by 8 other nations. It's pretty unlikely that France or the USA will attack us. Russia & China could absolutely destroy the UK with their 1st strike capability - any of our missiles that got through would barely make a dent. I'm not aware of any reason why India or Pakistan would attack us - their weapons are pointed at each other. Is there any realistic scenario where we would individually be at war with israel without the USA and/or Russia (with their huge nuclear arsenals) being involved too? That leaves North Korea. Firstly, they don't have a delivery system that could hit the UK. Secondly, why would they pick us first? Tell me again how spunking billions on Trident deters any of these major military threats? Top table but. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.