0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: drfchound on April 23, 2022, 01:02:50 pmHindsight eh Syd.When he was Labour leader you backed him to the hilt.As did some others on here.not wanting another lazy corrupt racist tory government lazy is a little different though aye Dot?
Hindsight eh Syd.When he was Labour leader you backed him to the hilt.As did some others on here.
Corbyn today in the Morning Star."There must be an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine, followed by a Russian troop withdrawal and agreement between Russia and Ukraine on future security arrangements."Reading between the lines and given that he's been cool about Zelensky and the idea of Ukraine defending itself... I think he's basically suggesting Ukraine surrenders and Russia withdraws. Future security arrangements would obviously be dictated by Putin.And for Corbyn that would be just fine because in his world Putin's Russia is apparently still preferable to the US.
Quote from: SydneyRover on April 23, 2022, 01:18:48 pmQuote from: drfchound on April 23, 2022, 01:02:50 pmHindsight eh Syd.When he was Labour leader you backed him to the hilt.As did some others on here.not wanting another lazy corrupt racist tory government lazy is a little different though aye Dot?And to think if Comrade Corbyn had won we would have got anti-Semite government that would have let Ukraine die under the Russian boot. A government that would have not have given weapons to Ukraine to defend their land with a government that would have made the current German government look generous in their support for Ukraine.
If Ukraine had followed Corbyns doctrine from the off, it would have capitulated in the first couple of days. Putin would have quickly installed a compliant government.Moldova would most likely have fallen too.Right now Putin would probably be threatening the Baltic's, or the Fins, or the Poles.Does Corbyn not understand this? I think he does and would not have minded.
I just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.
And to think if Comrade Corbyn had won we would have got anti-Semite government that would have let Ukraine die under the Russian boot. A government that would have not have given weapons to Ukraine to defend their land with a government that would have made the current German government look generous in their support for Ukraine.
Quote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between "tactical" and "nuclear" weapons, while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used is one example of how intellectually limited he is.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 23, 2022, 06:49:15 pmQuote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &quot;tactical&quot; and &quot;nuclear&quot; weapons, <b>while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used </b>is one example of how intellectually limited he is.Not sure where you get that?
Quote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &quot;tactical&quot; and &quot;nuclear&quot; weapons, <b>while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used </b>is one example of how intellectually limited he is.
Quote from: glosterred on April 23, 2022, 05:37:41 pmQuote from: SydneyRover on April 23, 2022, 01:18:48 pmQuote from: drfchound on April 23, 2022, 01:02:50 pmHindsight eh Syd.When he was Labour leader you backed him to the hilt.As did some others on here.not wanting another lazy corrupt racist tory government lazy is a little different though aye Dot?And to think if Comrade Corbyn had won we would have got anti-Semite government that would have let Ukraine die under the Russian boot. A government that would have not have given weapons to Ukraine to defend their land with a government that would have made the current German government look generous in their support for Ukraine.That couldn't be more wrong. If he'd reused to assist Ukraine, he would have been overuled by the Shadow Cabinet. If they'd not overruled him, there would have been a vote of no confidence by the Parliamentary Labour Party. He'd have had to put his 4th Form morals on the shelf, or be turfed out.That was the reason I was prepared to vote for a Corbyn-led Govt over a Johnson-led one in 2019. Because Corbyn's wilder ideas were opposed by the majority of Labour MPs, whereas Johnson's were embraced by most Tory MPs.
Quote from: Bristol Red Rover on April 23, 2022, 07:05:30 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 23, 2022, 06:49:15 pmQuote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &amp;quot;tactical&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;nuclear&amp;quot; weapons, &lt;b&gt;while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used &lt;/b&gt;is one example of how intellectually limited he is.Not sure where you get that?Read the article.Tactical nuclear weapons are battlefield weapons. With (compared to strategic weapons) generally limited yield. Because you don't want to wipe out your own forces while nuking the opposition.It is beyond any sensibly credible scenario for a single battlefield tactical warhead to kill hundreds of thousands of people. Because armed forces are rarely if ever concentrated in such vast numbers that a single tactical warhead could eliminate that number.It's (yet) another example of Corbyn basically displaying his lack of knowledge.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 23, 2022, 06:49:15 pmQuote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &amp;quot;tactical&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;nuclear&amp;quot; weapons, &lt;b&gt;while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used &lt;/b&gt;is one example of how intellectually limited he is.Not sure where you get that?
Quote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &amp;quot;tactical&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;nuclear&amp;quot; weapons, &lt;b&gt;while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used &lt;/b&gt;is one example of how intellectually limited he is.
.....One thing Johnson deserves credit for is the high level and swiftness of military aid being sent to Ukraine. Hence the praise he received from President Zelensky - a man not afraid to criticise world leaders in strong terms.....
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 23, 2022, 07:22:44 pmQuote from: Bristol Red Rover on April 23, 2022, 07:05:30 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 23, 2022, 06:49:15 pmQuote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &amp;amp;quot;tactical&amp;amp;quot; and &amp;amp;quot;nuclear&amp;amp;quot; weapons, &amp;lt;b&amp;gt;while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used &amp;lt;/b&amp;gt;is one example of how intellectually limited he is.Not sure where you get that?Read the article.Tactical nuclear weapons are battlefield weapons. With (compared to strategic weapons) generally limited yield. Because you don't want to wipe out your own forces while nuking the opposition.It is beyond any sensibly credible scenario for a single battlefield tactical warhead to kill hundreds of thousands of people. Because armed forces are rarely if ever concentrated in such vast numbers that a single tactical warhead could eliminate that number.It's (yet) another example of Corbyn basically displaying his lack of knowledge.I did read the article. Seems you don't have a grasp of tactical v strategic nukes. They are in many cases interchangable, just used in different contexts. And then there are smaller weapons that can still end up being used near ;arge populatoins - ie as evidenced in the Ukraine where both sides, particularly the Ukraines, are using human shields.
Quote from: Bristol Red Rover on April 23, 2022, 07:05:30 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 23, 2022, 06:49:15 pmQuote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &amp;amp;quot;tactical&amp;amp;quot; and &amp;amp;quot;nuclear&amp;amp;quot; weapons, &amp;lt;b&amp;gt;while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used &amp;lt;/b&amp;gt;is one example of how intellectually limited he is.Not sure where you get that?Read the article.Tactical nuclear weapons are battlefield weapons. With (compared to strategic weapons) generally limited yield. Because you don't want to wipe out your own forces while nuking the opposition.It is beyond any sensibly credible scenario for a single battlefield tactical warhead to kill hundreds of thousands of people. Because armed forces are rarely if ever concentrated in such vast numbers that a single tactical warhead could eliminate that number.It's (yet) another example of Corbyn basically displaying his lack of knowledge.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 23, 2022, 06:49:15 pmQuote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &amp;amp;quot;tactical&amp;amp;quot; and &amp;amp;quot;nuclear&amp;amp;quot; weapons, &amp;lt;b&amp;gt;while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used &amp;lt;/b&amp;gt;is one example of how intellectually limited he is.Not sure where you get that?
Quote from: River Don on April 23, 2022, 06:46:39 pmI just find it difficult to believe that someone with Corbyns long experience in politics is really that naive.You need to factor in a very germane point. He's really not very intelligent. Today's article where he distinguishes between &amp;amp;quot;tactical&amp;amp;quot; and &amp;amp;quot;nuclear&amp;amp;quot; weapons, &amp;lt;b&amp;gt;while appearing to have no comprehension of how tactical nuclear weapons would be used &amp;lt;/b&amp;gt;is one example of how intellectually limited he is.
I know very well the difference between tactical and strategic nuclear policy thanks BRR. A nuclear weapon of any size used against a densely populated area away from the battlefield is a strategic one.You'd be better off lecturing Corbyn. He seems to think the division is between "tactical" and and "nuclear" weapons.
...This reminds me of when Putin oversaw Assad's use of poison gas in Syria. Corbyn screamed that the proper process was for the UN to send its own investigation team to establish the facts. He said this immediately after Russia had vetoed such an investigation....