Sir Keir Starmer

That's the problem with brexit isn't it though? Those that support do so with a blind, unthinking face.
The fact that the fabled blue passport is less useful because it always free travel to fewer countries then the burgundy EU one is a fact.
The fact that we will need to have trade tariffs with EU countries (because we need trade, and no one would have tariff free trade) is also a fact.

Two massive negatives that are actually facts, not feelings, not "eye of the beholder" stuff but stone cold, facts of things that are happening.

I think (apart for the fact we are going to be living in a poorer country, and we have restricted movement) the thing that most upsets me about Brexit is it's like discussing any cult: any fact, any physically real thing can just be ignored on a "feeling". Maybe the EU will allow us to trade "hope and dreams" and "feelings" tariff free?

But you are ignoring what I'm saying, those are facts that are pertinent and a concern to you and I, and many, many others. But to some, they are not. At all. They wanted to stop sending money to the EU, they wanted back 'control' they didn't want millions of Turks moving in and using the NHS & welfare. All those things they were told by the media, social and otherwise they think are in a positon of gain, or being better off. The other stuff they don't care about. If they cared in the slightest about trade, tariffs, travel visas, pet passports, food standards and a myriad of thousands and thousands of things that will come to light more and more over the coming years they would have researched it and voted remain. The issues they felt most passionately about from the sources that they read, watched & listened to lead them to vote to leave. I doubt any of them will be changing their minds in the next couple of years.
 
So we have a thread on the right wing media's attempts to smear Keir Starmer, presumbaly because they see him as a credible threat, and we've had 4 pages revisting Blair's decision to invade Iraq and the last 2 pages rerunning the Brexit debate. In the meantime, this useless government ploughs on with mismanaging the country's response to the greatest public health crisis in a century.

This is why we seem to live in almost perpetual Tory government in this country. Those on the left never miss an opportunity to attack each other rather than those on the political right.
 
One Brexit benefit we no longer pay £32 billion a year into it.
Or between zero and £10 billion but yes that is a tangible benefit.

Hopefully that'll help to outweigh the damage caused by the extra trade tariffs.

Thanks though, I genuinely have been asking this question for 3 years and that's the first time someone has been able to give me a tangible, actual benefit.
 
I want to know how we can live in a perfect where JCB can check if Thier bulldozers are used to knock walls down

I am trying to think of the countries we should never deal with because of history; obviously not Germany and it's allies, Spain nope Franco, USA again no chance or any country it exports to, China nah what about the over 1 million Muslims locked up for their own good , every South American country had a dictator, cannot be Iceland due to the Cod wars, I think that leaves the Faroe Islands .

You could add the UK to your list of untouchables there s_a_b. But how about we start with the countries that are slaughtering,torturing, occupying and flouting UN conventions right now?
 
Again, you are not teaching me anything, I know all this already, I do not buy into western rhetoric about the middle east, but that doesn't mean that everything the west says and does in that region is wrong. Look for a bit more of a balanced view. Saddam was a murderous tyrant AND Israel are an apartheid state. These two facts are not mutually exclusive.
OK BoroMart.
There are mountains of credible evidence that prove Sadam had no weapons of mass destruction or the facilities or capacity to build them.
Tell me this: What changed between George Bush inviting and entertaining Taliban Leaders in Texas and d*ck Cheney visiting Saddam only a few years prior to the United States invasion? d*ck had his arm around Saddam at a time they said later the "tyrant" was allegedly plotting to destroy Kuwait and threaten the entire Western World.
[Do you not think it might be worth considering what changed Dicks approach]? One minute hes doing the bidding and playing the North Americans tune - then he becomes an evil tyrant!

Far from removing a tyrant, Iraq is now run by gangsters, armed with weapons provided by American $$$`s.
The same "allies" they used to "topple" this "evil" man are now firing weapons in The Green Zone and doing to the USA what the Vietcong did in Vietnam!

The invasion of a sovereign state which had never threatened to attack the United States, has left over 1,000,000 refugees in their own country. Over half a million people were either killed or seriously injured during the invasion. Cheney and Rumsfeld at a conference after the invasion, invited senior bankers and industrialists, including global oil corporations and chemical refiners: they are recorded bragging that Iraq`s oil would bring huge profits to those companies and described a scenario which had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with oil.

Meanwhile the USA snuggles up the arz of the tyranical religious fundamentalist butchers of Saudi - Arabia, who torture their own people: they still have the practice where gay people are beheaded and stoned to death - women have severe restrictions placed upon them - dissenters are executed.
They are currently bombing Yemen with armaments made in Britain - there is a famine on the horizon in Yemen, children dying of diseases due to lack of fresh water and medical care. This is a direct result of the ongoing genocidal slaughter conducted with impunity by Trumps "allies".

Wheres the USA invasion to topple those "evil" tyrants?

Maybe its because the Saudi`s have huge power and wealth due to their OIL resources - they also have an unholy alliance with Israel - another rogue state.

The Americans cannot chose whose country to invade [on the pretext of being democrats] and then claim immunity from being accountable for the deaths and injuries occasioned to millions of ordinary people.

Saddam`s departure was engineered to suit a much bigger objective of the United States - they wanted the oil.
They are trying to engineer a similar result in Venezuela - the CIA are well practiced in that. As is MOSSAD and MI6.

Unfortunately the "New World Order" experiment included the invasion of Syria and Iran, with the yapping dog Israel chomping at the bit to unleash its western - supplied weapons of mass destruction on its middle east neighbours. Our establishment continues to covertly nurture dissent and provide weapons to a rag tag of mercenaries and criminals in parts of Syria - they are portrayed as "rebels" - but they want the dollars not democracy.

The very act of invasion of Iraq signalled a series of repercussions and events which have made Syria and Iran even more powerful. The middle east is a more hostile place to the "West" than it was before the very first Iraq invasion. Saddam was painted as a pariah, after the western "allies" had poured millions of $$$$` into his pockets, and then removed by those same bankers for their own ends.

I dont doubt Saddam was a dictator or dishonourable man, but those American Presidents and our Prime-Ministers who volunteered to put our troops in the front line deserve the same fate as the Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials.
 
So we have a thread about Keir Starmer which has now turned into a conservation about Blair and Iraq and also Smalltown rambling on about Brexit to the point Stu may aswell not bother as ST takes zero notice. ST will surely remark about how I’m blocked no doubt too go along with his ramblings

I think where a thread goes so significantly off-topic like this one has there is a case for an administrator to shut it down.
 
I think where a thread goes so significantly off-topic like this one has there is a case for an administrator to shut it down.
I think they should ban brexit threads, some people are too emotionally involved and it can’t be good for their health.
 
OK BoroMart.
There are mountains of credible evidence that prove Sadam had no weapons of mass destruction or the facilities or capacity to build them.
Tell me this: What changed between George Bush inviting and entertaining Taliban Leaders in Texas and d*ck Cheney visiting Saddam only a few years prior to the United States invasion? d*ck had his arm around Saddam at a time they said later the "tyrant" was allegedly plotting to destroy Kuwait and threaten the entire Western World.
[Do you not think it might be worth considering what changed Dicks approach]? One minute hes doing the bidding and playing the North Americans tune - then he becomes an evil tyrant!

Far from removing a tyrant, Iraq is now run by gangsters, armed with weapons provided by American $$$`s.
The same "allies" they used to "topple" this "evil" man are now firing weapons in The Green Zone and doing to the USA what the Vietcong did in Vietnam!

The invasion of a sovereign state which had never threatened to attack the United States, has left over 1,000,000 refugees in their own country. Over half a million people were either killed or seriously injured during the invasion. Cheney and Rumsfeld at a conference after the invasion, invited senior bankers and industrialists, including global oil corporations and chemical refiners: they are recorded bragging that Iraq`s oil would bring huge profits to those companies and described a scenario which had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with oil.

Meanwhile the USA snuggles up the arz of the tyranical religious fundamentalist butchers of Saudi - Arabia, who torture their own people: they still have the practice where gay people are beheaded and stoned to death - women have severe restrictions placed upon them - dissenters are executed.
They are currently bombing Yemen with armaments made in Britain - there is a famine on the horizon in Yemen, children dying of diseases due to lack of fresh water and medical care. This is a direct result of the ongoing genocidal slaughter conducted with impunity by Trumps "allies".

Wheres the USA invasion to topple those "evil" tyrants?

Maybe its because the Saudi`s have huge power and wealth due to their OIL resources - they also have an unholy alliance with Israel - another rogue state.

The Americans cannot chose whose country to invade [on the pretext of being democrats] and then claim immunity from being accountable for the deaths and injuries occasioned to millions of ordinary people.

Saddam`s departure was engineered to suit a much bigger objective of the United States - they wanted the oil.
They are trying to engineer a similar result in Venezuela - the CIA are well practiced in that. As is MOSSAD and MI6.

Unfortunately the "New World Order" experiment included the invasion of Syria and Iran, with the yapping dog Israel chomping at the bit to unleash its western - supplied weapons of mass destruction on its middle east neighbours. Our establishment continues to covertly nurture dissent and provide weapons to a rag tag of mercenaries and criminals in parts of Syria - they are portrayed as "rebels" - but they want the dollars not democracy.

The very act of invasion of Iraq signalled a series of repercussions and events which have made Syria and Iran even more powerful. The middle east is a more hostile place to the "West" than it was before the very first Iraq invasion. Saddam was painted as a pariah, after the western "allies" had poured millions of $$$$` into his pockets, and then removed by those same bankers for their own ends.

I dont doubt Saddam was a dictator or dishonourable man, but those American Presidents and our Prime-Ministers who volunteered to put our troops in the front line deserve the same fate as the Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials.
Top post Roofie - you replaced that missing tile!
OK BoroMart.
There are mountains of credible evidence that prove Sadam had no weapons of mass destruction or the facilities or capacity to build them.
Tell me this: What changed between George Bush inviting and entertaining Taliban Leaders in Texas and d*ck Cheney visiting Saddam only a few years prior to the United States invasion? d*ck had his arm around Saddam at a time they said later the "tyrant" was allegedly plotting to destroy Kuwait and threaten the entire Western World.
[Do you not think it might be worth considering what changed Dicks approach]? One minute hes doing the bidding and playing the North Americans tune - then he becomes an evil tyrant!

Far from removing a tyrant, Iraq is now run by gangsters, armed with weapons provided by American $$$`s.
The same "allies" they used to "topple" this "evil" man are now firing weapons in The Green Zone and doing to the USA what the Vietcong did in Vietnam!

The invasion of a sovereign state which had never threatened to attack the United States, has left over 1,000,000 refugees in their own country. Over half a million people were either killed or seriously injured during the invasion. Cheney and Rumsfeld at a conference after the invasion, invited senior bankers and industrialists, including global oil corporations and chemical refiners: they are recorded bragging that Iraq`s oil would bring huge profits to those companies and described a scenario which had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with oil.

Meanwhile the USA snuggles up the arz of the tyranical religious fundamentalist butchers of Saudi - Arabia, who torture their own people: they still have the practice where gay people are beheaded and stoned to death - women have severe restrictions placed upon them - dissenters are executed.
They are currently bombing Yemen with armaments made in Britain - there is a famine on the horizon in Yemen, children dying of diseases due to lack of fresh water and medical care. This is a direct result of the ongoing genocidal slaughter conducted with impunity by Trumps "allies".

Wheres the USA invasion to topple those "evil" tyrants?

Maybe its because the Saudi`s have huge power and wealth due to their OIL resources - they also have an unholy alliance with Israel - another rogue state.

The Americans cannot chose whose country to invade [on the pretext of being democrats] and then claim immunity from being accountable for the deaths and injuries occasioned to millions of ordinary people.

Saddam`s departure was engineered to suit a much bigger objective of the United States - they wanted the oil.
They are trying to engineer a similar result in Venezuela - the CIA are well practiced in that. As is MOSSAD and MI6.

Unfortunately the "New World Order" experiment included the invasion of Syria and Iran, with the yapping dog Israel chomping at the bit to unleash its western - supplied weapons of mass destruction on its middle east neighbours. Our establishment continues to covertly nurture dissent and provide weapons to a rag tag of mercenaries and criminals in parts of Syria - they are portrayed as "rebels" - but they want the dollars not democracy.

The very act of invasion of Iraq signalled a series of repercussions and events which have made Syria and Iran even more powerful. The middle east is a more hostile place to the "West" than it was before the very first Iraq invasion. Saddam was painted as a pariah, after the western "allies" had poured millions of $$$$` into his pockets, and then removed by those same bankers for their own ends.

I dont doubt Saddam was a dictator or dishonourable man, but those American Presidents and our Prime-Ministers who volunteered to put our troops in the front line deserve the same fate as the Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials.
Top post Roofie - glad you replaced the missing tile!
 
Part of the case against Hussein was the supply of materials, chemicals and information illegally sold by the UK, the US and others in the 80’s that could be used to produce WMD’s, chemical attacks had been launched against Iran, the Kurds and the Shi’ite rebels between 1980 and 1991, to suggest the capabilities were not there is simply untrue, proving it when you’re complicit and would incriminate yourself as a Country is harder.

My view is that regime change in Iraq was a good thing but should have only have been carried out under a UN mandate.

I like Starmer and think he will bring a more clinical and pragmatic approach to policy and be able to repair some of the rifts of the Corbyn years.
 
Surely they have to have some semblance of what they are about rather than just criticising. It didn’t work out that well for the last fella not having a clear policy.
I think the last fella had too many policies at the election and got the Brexit stance wrong in 2019 compared to a much cleaner approach in 2017.
You are right of course that Labour will need policies in 2024 to fight the election but before then the Tories have a lot of self destructing as the impact of government incompetence with regard to handling of Covid 19, the oncoming recession/depression and the reality of post Brexit Britain take effect.
I think Starmer should continue to concentrate on dismantling Johnson and the Tories before setting out a better future under Labour from 2024 onwards.
 
Part of the case against Hussein was the supply of materials, chemicals and information illegally sold by the UK, the US and others in the 80’s that could be used to produce WMD’s, chemical attacks had been launched against Iran, the Kurds and the Shi’ite rebels between 1980 and 1991, to suggest the capabilities were not there is simply untrue, proving it when you’re complicit and would incriminate yourself as a Country is harder.

My view is that regime change in Iraq was a good thing but should have only have been carried out under a UN mandate.

I like Starmer and think he will bring a more clinical and pragmatic approach to policy and be able to repair some of the rifts of the Corbyn years.
Starmer is the establishment stalwart who is not just rising damp to the Labour Party, but the hole in the roof which will soon demolish the house.
The new Lib/Lab flannel.
 
I think where a thread goes so significantly off-topic like this one has there is a case for an administrator to shut it down.
Maybe it proves that politics and world events are interlinked?
Starmer`s foreign policy is to line up behind the USA, Israel and the imperialist agenda - ignoring the membership and returning its colours to Tory-lite.
 
I think where a thread goes so significantly off-topic like this one has there is a case for an administrator to shut it down.
Spoken like a true democrat: if a discussion progresses beyond that which is comfortable - deny its validity and deny those the voice to engage.
Censorship.
I like your musical tastes btw.(y)
 
Spoken like a true democrat: if a discussion progresses beyond that which is comfortable - deny its validity and deny those the voice to engage.
Censorship.

The discussion isn't uncomfortable for me Roofie, just boring.
 
Back
Top