General Discussion: Politics thread


Show original post
MuayThaiPimp
MuayThaiPimp avatar

7498 posts since 10/8/11

12 Sep 2013 10:25
It's only a matter of time before a strike on Syria, I think Putin is posturing publicly at least…I'm sure it's planned and all
macgy
macgy avatar

172 posts since 26/11/11

12 Sep 2013 11:41
I think Obama is glad Putin gave him the option of backing down and save face. The odds looked grimm in congress. However he is now realising that Putin didn't give it to them for free. It's part of a long plot of tying future US military action to the UN security council or some other plot because I don't think Putin gives a shit about Syria. However the Democrats favour tying military action to the UN I think so not really a slap in the face for them. On the other side UN hasn't hindered US military action in the past and if we get a new warmonger president it won't hinder it in the future.
elvrum
elvrum avatar

620 posts since 18/7/12

12 Sep 2013 12:07
putin is certainly making obama seem like the lesser statesmen. he appears dove like in getting syria to agree to the weapons deal, and on the day he returns to geneva pens a 'give peace a chance' op ed in one of the biggest and most respected US papers. what's he's up to is another question but it's 1-0 to russia in regard to international diplomacy.
bill
bill avatar

4605 posts since 5/8/09

24 Sep 2013 22:00
Is there anyone who can ever, ever see Ed Miliband as pm? I'm not even listening to his policies just purely judging him on the way he looks and talks. Can't get past it.
rural
rural avatar

16483 posts since 26/9/06

24 Sep 2013 22:02
Looks like a character from The Simpsons.
Hello World
Hello World avatar

12043 posts since 7/3/05

24 Sep 2013 22:15
No, and the new policies are mental.
YLAup
YLAup avatar

3644 posts since 5/9/11

24 Sep 2013 23:33
I probably would've gone for Labour had his banana weilding brother got the leadership. They missed a trick there.

Edit, no I wouldn't. Their entire front bench is a joke including ed and his wife. Andy Burnham sounds semi decent though.
deuce
deuce avatar

13155 posts since 21/1/08

24 Sep 2013 23:50
rural wrote: Looks like a character from The Simpsons.
wallace and gromit char
Double D
Double D avatar

3386 posts since 8/3/07

25 Sep 2013 11:07
YLAup wrote: Their entire front bench is a joke including ed and his wife.
By contrast the likes of Michael Gove and George Osborne have displayed staggering competency Laughing out loud
elvrum
elvrum avatar

620 posts since 18/7/12

25 Sep 2013 11:36
i know gove gets a lot of stick but i think some of it is unwarranted. from what i've seen he's one of the most passionate and involved people in the commons. one of the most intelligent anyway. even if i didn't agree with his schools policy i'd rather listen to him talk than the majority of politicians who give the same cookie cutter lines and repetitive arguments.
Toasted
Toasted avatar

1591 posts since 15/10/09

25 Sep 2013 12:40
There's real depth in labour. Andy Burnham, Stella Creasy, Chuka Umuna, Rachel Reeves. All good. More beside those headlines.

The new proposals might be "mental" but at least they're saying something different and align with trad labour values. Same Old Tories are shafting the working class.

Couldn't disagree more on Gove. Bloke's a psycho.
elvrum
elvrum avatar

620 posts since 18/7/12

25 Sep 2013 13:34
andy burnham having depth Eek Laughing out loud

not sure what you're drinking but rachel reeves is up there with the worst regardless of party. i know several people that work for labour and they tell me most people in the party roll their eyes when she appears on television. she's utterly useless - mostly regurgitates party rhetoric. not to mention having the most monotonous voice.

i doubt labour will align itself with 'traditional labour values' any time soon. that's if you're talking about pre blair etc.
Trystero
Trystero avatar

1510 posts since 1/8/07

25 Sep 2013 13:43
elvrum wrote: rachel reeves is up there with the worst regardless of party. i know several people that work for labour and they tell me most people in the party roll their eyes when she appears on television.

she certainly didn't do herself any favours with that Newsnight interview
'boring, snoring Rachel Reeves' tag is definitely going to stick
Hello World
Hello World avatar

12043 posts since 7/3/05

25 Sep 2013 20:25
Already rolling back the price freeze concept, wasn't the quoted savings something like £120 over 20 months? 6 quid a month? its pissing in the ocean.

If they want socialism then start taxing and renationalise, however that totally insular ideology only works if you do not need global trade and have enormous internal resources, why would any business try to compete with an unlimited government budget utility?

If theres no profit they wont bother, next thing the UK has to run the entire national grid from taxes, how are they going to possible raise the money to do that?

We have a dangerous resource in fracking but thats doomsday to an election, wheres the natural gas going to come from magic land?

I completely approve of socialist ideologies in societies and country's that can support it, I don't think the UK can anymore.
CovOne
CovOne avatar

8564 posts since 17/8/04

25 Sep 2013 21:14
elvrum wrote: i know gove gets a lot of stick but i think some of it is unwarranted. from what i've seen he's one of the most passionate and involved people in the commons. one of the most intelligent anyway. even if i didn't agree with his schools policy i'd rather listen to him talk than the majority of politicians who give the same cookie cutter lines and repetitive arguments.

What has Gove ever said/done that is remotely intelligent or passionate?
elvrum
elvrum avatar

620 posts since 18/7/12

26 Sep 2013 00:31
what's the point? sounds like you've made your mind up already.
kid unknown
kid unknown avatar

5072 posts since 8/12/01

26 Sep 2013 09:01
Hello World wrote: No, and the new policies are mental.


this.

anyone else think that if labour get in this time, they will be in for good?
Trumps
Trumps avatar

587 posts since 7/9/09

26 Sep 2013 09:14
Hello World wrote: Already rolling back the price freeze concept, wasn't the quoted savings something like £120 over 20 months? 6 quid a month? its pissing in the ocean.

If they want socialism then start taxing and renationalise, however that totally insular ideology only works if you do not need global trade and have enormous internal resources, why would any business try to compete with an unlimited government budget utility?

If theres no profit they wont bother, next thing the UK has to run the entire national grid from taxes, how are they going to possible raise the money to do that?

We have a dangerous resource in fracking but thats doomsday to an election, wheres the natural gas going to come from magic land?

I completely approve of socialist ideologies in societies and country's that can support it, I don't think the UK can anymore.

How do you feel about the NHS then?
Double D
Double D avatar

3386 posts since 8/3/07

26 Sep 2013 11:22
elvrum wrote: i know gove gets a lot of stick but i think some of it is unwarranted. from what i've seen he's one of the most passionate and involved people in the commons. one of the most intelligent anyway. even if i didn't agree with his schools policy i'd rather listen to him talk than the majority of politicians who give the same cookie cutter lines and repetitive arguments.
Oh, he's certainly enthusiastic; I'd just like to see his barrage of ideas applied to something that couldn't get any worse, like transport or energy.
Double D
Double D avatar

3386 posts since 8/3/07

26 Sep 2013 11:25
kid unknown wrote:
Hello World wrote: No, and the new policies are mental.


this.

anyone else think that if labour get in this time, they will be in for good?
They won't get in. 2015 has Lab/Lib coalition written all over it unless something incredible happens, and with the bizarrely bulletproof BoJo likely taking the reins anything could happen in 2020.