Topics about the Labour Party
:sunglasses: 44.4 % ❤ 5.6 % :thumbsup: 5.6 % :grinning: 33.3 % 😟 5.6 % :cry: 5.6 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
#566421
Biggus Robbus wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:42 am
Winegums wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:03 am
Please explain. I assume you're not from the UK, and therefore may not be aware that everything Blair touches immediately becomes toxic.
Nah I only lived in the UK for the majority of my life.

Blair screwed up with the Iraq war. If the Tories were in power they would have joined in the Iraq war too. Blair was merely trying to scrub off the association of Michael Foot's *cough* Corbyn *cough* association with CND and the like.
Wanting to live in a world without nuclear weapons. How ghastly. Thank god Blair showed us he wasn't some weak wristed liberal by misleading parliament, ignoring the will of the people, and killing about a million brown people and taking their oil.

Hey Bush even sacked Rumsfeld. I give him credit for that. More importantly he put Petraeus in charge of The Surge, which, whether you like it or not, reduced violence in Iraq.

However that's dealing with facts.
"There was a lot of violence in Iraq with resistance groups fighting us. Then we sent more soldiers to kill them all and now there's less. We are good people"
#566444
Winegums wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:46 am
Wanting to live in a world without nuclear weapons. How ghastly.
Wanting to live in a world without nuclear weapons is a perfectly good thing. Deciding that the best way you can do this is to get rid of your own nuclear weapons and hope that nice Mr Putin will do likewise out of the goodness of his heart is downright naive to the point of stupidity.
Cyclist liked this
#566478
Winegums wrote:Wanting to live in a world without nuclear weapons. How ghastly.
It was Labour who got the UK nuclear weapons. People often forget that.
Ernest Bevin wrote:We've got to have this thing over here, whatever it costs. We've got to have the bloody Union Jack on top of it.



Winegums wrote:Thank god Blair showed us he wasn't some weak wristed liberal by misleading parliament, ignoring the will of the people, and killing about a million brown people and taking their oil.


As if the Tories would have done different.

Won any big elections or referendums against the right recently? I must admit it's been awhile since I visited Blighty.



Winegums wrote:
Rob wrote: Hey Bush even sacked Rumsfeld. I give him credit for that. More importantly he put Petraeus in charge of The Surge, which, whether you like it or not, reduced violence in Iraq.

However that's dealing with facts.
"There was a lot of violence in Iraq with resistance groups fighting us. Then we sent more soldiers to kill them all and now there's less. We are good people"

That is not what happened in the surge at all. The violence went down in Iraq. A lot of people were not killed that is the point.
#566496
Winegums wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:46 am
Thank god Blair showed us he wasn't some weak wristed liberal by misleading parliament, ignoring the will of the people, and killing about a million brown people and taking their oil.
Not to labour the point, but where exactly is your fucking outrage about Corbyn repeatedly misleading his party and the public about what is possible within the EU, repeatedly ignoring the will of his party AND the public on still pushing for Brexit (and letting an unelected advisor chop out any bits from speeches and responses he doesn't like that might lead to an outbreak of democracy), and in doing so (by way of supporting a hardline Tory policy that will cause austerity for decades) killing and leaving destitute an as-yet unknown number of people all in order to take away their freedoms and rights? Blair didn't pull the trigger or drop any bombs, but if he is responsible then Corbyn will be just as responsible for the deaths and despair that will happen from mass job losses, medical shortages, potential food shortages and so on.

We tried to stop Blair and didn't manage to. Corbyn and May's adventure in misery can still be stopped, but you're too busy cheerleading for people who want to sack MPs for not being big enough suck-ups and hoping that out of the rubble, based on a budget of fuckall, we'll suddenly have some lovely utopian socialist revolution as opposed to being trapped in an appalling, ultra-low scrutiny zero-rights tax haven.

You're not part of the right and good protest this time, Winegums. You're part of the problem. You're on the wrong side. Your lot ARE 'the baddies'. And when this is all written up in many years to come, when Corbyn is long gone from old age and enjoying the ultimate freedom from responsibility and accountability, you'll have to live with being on the wrong side of history. You don't have to become a centrist or give up anything you believe, but on the assumption you genuinely want what's best for people you should really have enough nouse to recognise when you're being sold a pup by a bunch of authoritarians and wannabe autocrats with an antisemitism problem, even if they wear red rosettes.
bluebellnutter, cycloon, Kreuzberger and 7 others liked this
#566500
If in doubt, scream the word "IRAQ" into the face of dissenters until they stop pointing out awkward things like all this
#566539
The thing is Tony Blair would be the last politician to screw up by taking the UK into another bad war.

That's why he was so successful (otherwise). He was capable of learning.

Can you point to any of the current batch of Labour MPs who can lead and and learn at the same time?

It's as if the Blair haters would rather endlessly go on about Iraq than have a shot at winning an election.
#566563
lord_kobel wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:39 am
Well, yes. Actually being in power would take effort.
And compromising on your purity.
  • 1
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43

Flybmi collapses, blaming Brexit uncertainty […]

Just when you think Yaxley-Lennon couldn’t b[…]

Jeremy Corbyn.

It doesn't but it can be a nuisance to Labour.

The Tories, Generally

Exclusive: Tory Party 'In Denial' Over Islamopho[…]