Jump to content
 
 
 
 
Sign in to follow this  
buster.

UK Foreign Office or The Ministry of Spin ? (Private Eye)

Recommended Posts

On 13/01/2019 at 22:03, forlanssister said:

 As for it's ok for Corbyn to be a terrorist supporter because others are too wtf really, you're better than that. 

Corbyn judged the Iraq invasion of 2003 correctly and whilst it didn't make any practical difference at the time, it points to someone who in a similar situation, wouldn't simply be a poodle for the USA as all the other alternatives would. Taking control back is a current theme, isn't it ?

 

It turned out to be the biggest and worst foreign policy decision of this century.

The so called 'War on Terror' was at best, a foolish strategic error and very possibly a deliberate mistake. 

Think about all those lives lost.

 

On 13/01/2019 at 22:03, forlanssister said:

You did indeed but your fantasy is being bitch slapped by the reality outside of your bubble. Despite the rise in  populism coming from the right it doesn't automatically follow those populists are all neoliberals far from it. 

I didn't say they were.

 

On 13/01/2019 at 22:03, forlanssister said:

Trump only won because of the arrogance and the ignorance of the Democratic Party and their Clinton is God complex. Seriously how the f*&k was an intellectually redundant billionaire who lives in a gilded cage on New York's 5th Avenue more in tune with unemployed former steelworkers in the rust belt than the Democratic Party?  

Yes and the DNC rigged their own process, were caught and deserved to lose.

Corrupt party in a corrupt political system.

 

On 13/01/2019 at 22:03, forlanssister said:

IMO it's the Populist Leftist Antifa and their brethren being funded by the likes of Soros who pose a greater risk to society.  

Soros is up to all sorts and is part of a corrupt culture.

 

On 13/01/2019 at 22:03, forlanssister said:

LOL...in other words as I said they simply aren't as good at playing the game eh?

 

All sides use divide an conquer as that's the prequel to the unity (or perhaps subjugation) you crave , the Corbynistas are giving us a real time demonstration with their entryism into the constituency Labour Parties of any MP that opposes ant-semitism. 

You said earlier that the Israelis wiould be negligent if they weren't doing something regards the possibility of Corbyn becoming PM,....well as we know, they are powerful, have a lot of influence, are good at the dark arts and have the Labour party in difficulty regards the anti-semitism campaign.

 

On 13/01/2019 at 22:03, forlanssister said:

That the scale of abuse/benefit has ebbed and flowed is self evident as that's the nature of the beast and currently it's way out of kilter of what could pass as acceptable but history is littered with evidence that a Leftist Revolution cannot provide the change required all it does is change the faces.

 A traditional Labour party winning a General Election isn't a "Leftist Revolution".

 

Four decades of the same political ideology needs to be brought to an end by a party who looks to provide a political and economic counterbalance, simples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, buster. said:

Corbyn judged the Iraq invasion of 2003 correctly and whilst it didn't make any practical difference at the time, it points to someone who in a similar situation, wouldn't simply be a poodle for the USA as all the other alternatives would. Taking control back is a current theme, isn't it ?

 

It turned out to be the biggest and worst foreign policy decision of this century.

The so called 'War on Terror' was at best, a foolish strategic error and very possibly a deliberate mistake. 

Think about all those lives lost.

 

Again remind me how long did Cook's (and Corbyn's you see to think) Ethical Foreign Policy last? If voting against the Iraq War is your criteria for Prime Minister then the likes of Kenneth Clarke (who actually has held one of the Great Offices of State) is surely a shoe-in no? Me neither.

 

We should have just left Al-Qada and it's associates free reign to bomb and kill whoever they wanted?

 

30 minutes ago, buster. said:

I didn't say they were.

 

Your reply certainly implied it, re "align themselves with parts of neoliberalism" why just the right when there's plenty on the left certainly do?

 

35 minutes ago, buster. said:

 

Yes and the DNC rigged their own process, were caught and deserved to lose.

Corrupt party in a corrupt political system.

 

We concur, however I've never seen a political system that isn't corrupt have you?

 

36 minutes ago, buster. said:

Soros is up to all sorts and is part of a corrupt culture.

 

Mainly funding that left wing populism you so crave.

 

38 minutes ago, buster. said:

You said earlier that the Israelis wiould be negligent if they weren't doing something regards the possibility of Corbyn becoming PM,....well as we know, they are powerful, have a lot of influence, are good at the dark arts and have the Labour party in difficulty regards the anti-semitism campaign.

 

Of course they would be.

 

I posit that the biggest difficulty the Labour Party has in regards to anti-semitism is that it's led by an anti-semite who has made it a comfortable home for those of that ilk.

 

44 minutes ago, buster. said:

 A traditional Labour party winning a General Election isn't a "Leftist Revolution".

 

Four decades of the same political ideology needs to be brought to an end by a party who looks to provide a political and economic counterbalance, simples. 

The Labour Party under Corbyn isn't a traditional Labour Party, if it were it would be in power,simples!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/01/2019 at 21:11, forlanssister said:

We should have just left Al-Qada and it's associates free reign to bomb and kill whoever they wanted? 

The Iraq invasion was a huge foreign policy decision that has had huge repercussions.

It wasn't a mistake though, it was about deceit and lies on a grand scale.

Thing is most still listen to the same or similarly minded people as if nothing had happened.

 

Your own question points towards part of a complex answer, AQ weren't in Iraq whilst Saudi Arabia, the main sponsers of terrorism in the Middle East were kept as allies.

 

On 15/01/2019 at 21:11, forlanssister said:

We concur, however I've never seen a political system that isn't corrupt have you? 

Scale !

On 15/01/2019 at 21:11, forlanssister said:

Of course they would be.

 

I posit that the biggest difficulty the Labour Party has in regards to anti-semitism is that it's led by an anti-semite who has made it a comfortable home for those of that ilk. 

I posit that you've bought the line of attack by those who you conceded would be negligent not to go after Corbyn.

 

On 15/01/2019 at 21:11, forlanssister said:

The Labour Party under Corbyn isn't a traditional Labour Party, if it were it would be in power,simples!

Read the last manifesto !  

It's Traditional as opposed to 'New Neoliberal' Labour.

It probably would be in power had they a younger and more charismatic leader who was more difficult for the heavy machinery to step on. Thing is anyone much younger than Corbyn will be relying on books to tell him what traditional Labour in power was about. They have to find a modern brand of tradition that has to provide a political counterbalance.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, buster. said:

They have to find a modern brand of tradition that has to provide a political counterbalance.

They have.  Identity politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, buster. said:

The Iraq invasion was a huge foreign policy decision that has had huge repercussions.

It wasn't a mistake though, it was about deceit and lies on a grand scale.

Thing is most still listen to the same or similarly minded people as if nothing had happened.

 

And was brought to us by a Labour government with an "Ethical Foreign Policy".

 

3 hours ago, buster. said:

Your own question points towards part of a complex answer, AQ weren't in Iraq whilst Saudi Arabia, the main sponsers of terrorism in the Middle East were kept as allies.

 

Al Qada are/were all over the Muslim world however the Baathist regime kept them down. I'd have no problem if the Arabian desert was turned into a sheet of glass.

 

3 hours ago, buster. said:

I posit that you've bought the line of attack by those who you conceded would be negligent not to go after Corbyn.

 

The Israelis didn't invite the IRA to Westminster days after they bombed Brighton, the Israelis didn't lay a wreath at the graves of the Black September terrorists who perpetrated the Munich Massacre. The Israelis don't stand on platforms and describe Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists as their friends and brothers. That was all Corbyn's own doing, "by your actions shall ye be known". 

 

3 hours ago, buster. said:

 

It's Traditional as opposed to 'New Neoliberal' Labour.

It probably would be in power had they a younger and more charismatic leader who was more difficult for the heavy machinery to step on. Thing is anyone much younger than Corbyn will be relying on books to tell him what traditional Labour in power was about. They have to find a modern brand of tradition that has to provide a political counterbalance.

 

Ye Olde wrong kind of socialism again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, forlanssister said:

And was brought to us by a Labour government with an "Ethical Foreign Policy". 

New and Neo-liberal Labour

 

8 hours ago, forlanssister said:

Al Qada are/were all over the Muslim world however the Baathist regime kept them down. I'd have no problem if the Arabian desert was turned into a sheet of glass. 

So Iraq was invaded on a pack of lies.

 

8 hours ago, forlanssister said:

The Israelis didn't invite the IRA to Westminster days after they bombed Brighton, the Israelis didn't lay a wreath at the graves of the Black September terrorists who perpetrated the Munich Massacre. The Israelis don't stand on platforms and describe Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists as their friends and brothers. That was all Corbyn's own doing, "by your actions shall ye be known".  

If you want to talk about politicans actually involved with terror look at those going into Iraq, who support Saudi Arabia and their Jihadist groups.

 

8 hours ago, forlanssister said:

Ye Olde wrong kind of socialism again!

Socialism is what the banks asked for in 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, buster. said:

New and Neo-liberal Labour

So as well as the "wrong kind of Socialism" we now have the "wrong kind of Labour Party"? :D

 

13 hours ago, buster. said:

So Iraq was invaded on a pack of lies.

Aye, Labour lies.

 

13 hours ago, buster. said:

If you want to talk about politicans actually involved with terror look at those going into Iraq, who support Saudi Arabia and their Jihadist groups.

No let's talk about Corbyn and his real, clear and well documented love of terrorists, anti-semite terrorists at that.

 

13 hours ago, buster. said:

Socialism is what the banks asked for in 2008.

Asked for or got?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the invasion of Iraq was brought about by our poodle-esque relationship with the US.  And the US are dictated to by certain interests, internal and external. 

 

As a British citizen, I'm far more concerned about Corbyn's relationship with terrorists closer to home than his interests in the perennial mess that is the Middle East.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.