General Election 2017

[midnight_rendezvous]

It doesn't matter that this is a hypothetical scenario. Government involves constantly running hypothetical models of the economy, our defence etc etc. Same everywhere and if the U.K. will not use its deterrent you can bet this will appear in the hypothetical calculations of countries that wish us harm.

Only 9 nations across the world have a nuclear arsenal but you don't see the ones that don't getting bombed just because they don't have one. If a country or organisation genuinely wants to do us harm they will. And even if we scrapped trident they still wouldn't use them because the use of them would all but lead to nuclear mutually assured destruction because even if we didn't retaliate or couldn't you could bet someone else would.

 

[Ernest]

Its an odd thing, isn't it. A political leader who finds it distasteful to bluster about rediculous hypotheticals in order to win cheap political points.

A cynic may say of course he realises that all your Sun and Mail readers, Loonies etc., are not suddenly going to vote Team Jeremy just because he vows to avenge their smoking bodies by nuking someone.

Or maybe he's just more comfortable with the truth

I say all that still wishing that Andy Burnham was labour leader . . . . . . if he were labour would have a double digit lead by now . . . .

There wouldn't have been an election if the Tories thought they would only have a 10% lead in the polls let alone Labour having one

 

[Bozza]

Its an odd thing, isn't it. A political leader who finds it distasteful to bluster about rediculous hypotheticals in order to win cheap political points.

A cynic may say of course he realises that all your Sun and Mail readers, Loonies etc., are not suddenly going to vote Team Jeremy just because he vows to avenge their smoking bodies by nuking someone.

Or maybe he's just more comfortable with the truth

I say all that still wishing that Andy Burnham was labour leader . . . . . . if he were labour would have a double digit lead by now . . . .

And if David Cameron was still in the job, the referee would have to step in and rescue Corbyn.

 

[GT49er]

All discussed at length on the EU but for balance

https://www.ft.com/content/7c008997-e2a9-360d-89a3-1646dcbdae0f

Useful link that - 'Subscribe to read!'

It's not as straight forward as just saying yes there are issues of healthcare etc

There are arrangements in place for healthcare. Retaining existing conditions for UK ex-pats and EU migrants in the UK can include the healthcare arrangements. Very straightforward indeed, except for Merkel and Tusk refusing to accept a reasonable offer.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

And if David Cameron was still in the job, the referee would have to step in and rescue Corbyn.

Erm, a pre- 'lost the referendum' Cameron, certainly. A post- 'lead you down the garden path then flounce off' Cameron, it would only be 5-7%

 

[beorhthelm]

Hit the brakes chaps, screeeeechhhhhh, got to do another U Turn whilst all the idiots worry about Corbyn not pressing the red button

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-housing-policy-u-turn-affordable-homes-general-election-2017-manifesto-a7769866.html

so its a U turn now when a minister provides detail that differs from peoples interpretation of a policy? if you read the article, its more of a changing lane and a u-turn.

what we should be asking is how will either of the parties deliver on promises to build houses without any change to planning laws.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Useful link that - 'Subscribe to read!'



There are arrangements in place for healthcare. Retaining existing conditions for UK ex-pats and EU migrants in the UK can include the healthcare arrangements. Very straightforward indeed, except for Merkel and Tusk refusing to accept a reasonable offer.

Or it just shows what an absolute ball ache and costly process it is going to be to be worse off.

It's a negotiation position, it seems like we are the only side allowed to have them.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Only 9 nations across the world have a nuclear arsenal but you don't see the ones that don't getting bombed just because they don't have one. If a country or organisation genuinely wants to do us harm they will. And even if we scrapped trident they still wouldn't use them because the use of them would all but lead to nuclear mutually assured destruction because even if we didn't retaliate or couldn't you could bet someone else would.

What if all the democracies took this step ? We would have no-one then to fall back
on. It seems like an abrogation of our responsibilities to declare that someone else needs to pay the bills and take responsibility for our defence.

 

[GT49er]

Us saying we are buggering off and then listing demands early doors is a bit arrogant isn't it?

Us making a very reasonable and sensible suggestion that would relieve the fears of thousands of EU citizens sounds like an offer, not a demand. Now, demanding a goodness knows how many £Billion payment to leave before negotiations proper can begin - now that is a demand.........

 

[pastafarian]

Its an odd thing, isn't it. A political leader who finds it distasteful to bluster about rediculous hypotheticals in order to win cheap political points.

A cynic may say of course he realises that all your Sun and Mail readers, Loonies etc., are not suddenly going to vote Team Jeremy just because he vows to avenge their smoking bodies by nuking someone.

Or maybe he's just more comfortable with the truth

I say all that still wishing that Andy Burnham was labour leader . . . . . . if he were labour would have a double digit lead by now . . . .

Its not about finding it distasteful at all, he was simply stumped on the issue with his policy not matching the demands and rigours surrounding defence.
We are talking about National Defence here, the hypotheticals around it are not ridiculous or cheap, and neither do you have to be relegated to the level of a loony to consider it a massive policy issue, its not all rainbows and lollipops out in the wider world at the moment.
The rhetoric now of belittling the whole issue simply because Corbyn is uncomfortable discussing it is not helpful.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

'We' chose to leave, not them. I think holding off on their position is fine. They didn't want us to leave. Us saying we are buggering off and then listin demands early doors is a bit arrogant isn't it?

We are not listing demands. We are about to enter into negotiations to find a mutually acceptable way forward between the U.K. and the EU. The role of politicians on both sides is to implement the will of the people not to act out their
own personal views. Both sides (not just the U.K. Government) need to be reminded of this.

 

[GT49er]

And if David Cameron was still in the job, the referee would have to step in and rescue Corbyn.

.....and if Tony Blair was still in the job, the referee would have to step in and rescue Cameron. If wishes were horses, eh?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

And as soon as he does do that he'll be set upon by his opponents and the right wing sections of the media saying "see you can't trust him, he won't even stick to his own principles". It's a no win situation for him and I think he's done pretty well in answering the questions put forward to him the best he can. He said to Paxman or Neil, can't remember which now, that the manifesto was a party led set of policies and that as Leader he'll respect them, which included renewal of Trident. Now I know he had a get out clause of the Defense Review they'd go through, but every incoming government does that I'm sure.

A very fair point and one that in my view made him the wrong choice for leader right from the start. As a private citizen he should continue to argue for his principles if he still believes in them. As a prospective PM responsible for national security I think his
position is untenable.

 

[KVLT]

What if all the democracies took this step ? We would have no-one then to fall back
on. It seems like an abrogation of our responsibilities to declare that someone else needs to pay the bills and take responsibility for our defence.

Don't agree. Retaliation doesn't have to be by nuclear means. Even diplomatically an instigator of an unprovoked attack would be so isolated on the world stage as to be dysfunctional.

 

[soistes]

Old white British men exercising their democratic rights 'terrifies' you? I take it then that assuming you're a white bloke who isn't yet of that demographic that you haven't even considered that statistically there's a good chance that when you're their age your political outlook and priorities may resemble theirs.

Don't have nightmares.

At 62, I'm probably older than some of them, as it happens. I doubt I'll really have nightmares but, yes, there is something about that red-faced, finger-jabbing, "let me tell you...." mode from fat bald right-wing white men (of any age), that I find slightly scary, if I'm honest.

As far as my own perspective evolving with age is concerned, if anything, my views are rather more left-wing than when I was younger (and I wasn't exactly right of centre then).

 

[BigGully]

At 62, I'm probably older than most of them, as it happens. I doubt I'll really have nightmares but, yes, there is something about that red-faced, finger-jabbing, "let me tell you...." mode from fat bald right-wing white men, that I find slightly scary, if I'm honest.

As far as my own perspective evolving with age is concerned, if anything, my views are rather more left-wing than when I was younger (and I wasn't exactly right of centre then).

Your just a caricature of 'love thy neighbour' in reverse, can you not see the absurdity of your prejudice ........

 

[jimhigham]

While Corbyn's defence position is laudably principled it's also untainted by the complex interplay between nations and insurgents the world over. Even as a leftie, I found it discomfiting. Here's the thing though. I consider the scenarios put to him last night to be highly unlikely/hypothetical. I find the situations he puts to us regarding food banks, A&E departments, rough sleepers outside stations and the like to be happening all about us, every day, now. I'll take his response to the immediate risks we all face any day of the week. Others will see this as dismissing a bigger picture. That's fine. It's a democracy and I don't expect to be on the winning side come Friday.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Don't agree. Retaliation doesn't have to be by nuclear means. Even diplomatically an instigator of an unprovoked attack would be so isolated on the world stage as to be dysfunctional.

They would be isolated and we would be dead. We need to deter this outcome.

 

[KVLT]

They would be isolated

That, in itself is a deterrent.

If we use our nukes in retaliation we are also dead.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I've yet to see a Brexit analogy that didn't get stretched so far from its shaky base by ever more ludicrous clauses that it just becomes silly. This latest one is a belter. Apparently bus drivers run an Uber style pricing depending on how much you look like you need to take their bus.

Its not that far off actually.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/uber-uberhop-bus

"Uber launches feature which is basically a very small bus"