Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Corbyn Wins Backing From Over 40 Economists
Topic Started: Aug 23 2015, 01:40 PM (966 Views)
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Oh dear, this should cause a few burst blood vessels on the forum:-

http://news.sky.com/story/1540216/corbyn-wins-backing-from-over-40-economists

Corbyn Wins Backing From Over 40 Economists

An ex-BoE adviser is among the signatories to a letter dismissing claims Jeremy Corbyn is on the extreme left of economic policy.
02:16, UK,
Sunday 23 August 2015

Dozens of UK economists - including a former Bank of England adviser - have indicated they are publicly backing the policies of Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn.


In a significant boost to Mr Corbyn's campaign, more than 40 economists have reportedly added their signatures to a letter in the Observer dismissing claims the Islington North MP is "extreme".

Instead, they argue that Mr Corbyn's opposition to austerity is "actually mainstream economics".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 23 2015, 11:27 PM
Pro Veritas
Aug 23 2015, 06:06 PM
C-too
Aug 23 2015, 05:25 PM
His heart-on-sleeve political approach just does not gel with the electorate.
So why is he favourite to win the leadership contest then?

All The Best
Why is he favourite ? You would have to ask the knob heads who are making him favourite. Perhaps starting with the members of the Stop the War Coalition ? ;D

Even so I'm referring to the voters in a general election.
He is the favourite because he appeals to much of the body politics of Labour. There always has been the wannabe Communist, Militant Tendency and Spite n Envy Brigade in their ranks. They have just come out of their respective closets and surprised all with their numbers. They remained quiet under NL now they are vocal again and desperate to fight the 1980s battle all over again.
Corbyn will, if elected as Leader, write an even longer Dearth Wish than Foot.
Quote:
 
Thomas Hobbes thought that the Roman Catholic Church was "the ghost of the Roman Empire sitting crowned upon the grave thereof". Would he now think that Corbyn is the ghost of Tony Benn sitting on the grave of the Labour Party?


Electing Corbyn will give Cameron the opportunity of emulating Thatcher and once again defenestrate the Labour Party. But as Osborne is likely to be the next Tory Leader he might sub-contract that simple task to him.

An uninterrupted 20 years of Tory misrule is now a very distinct possibility as they will not be opposed by a Labour Party with Corbyn's crack-pot ideas. They will be gifted a free hand to push through welfare and education reforms and establish these to such a degree that they will become the expected norm that only a fool or a brave Politician will tamper with. He will also embolden the Tory anti-EU faction to become vocal and oppose any weaknesses they see in Cameron's, nay Osborne's, EU negotiation strategy. You see Corbyn is also not a fan of the EU, well he did not used to be and he seems the type not to change his mind easily. This could be a boost for the Brexit Brigade. A weak Opposition will also see a return of Tory arrogance which in turn will be the seeds of their inevitable downfall, in the early 2030s say.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Aug 23 2015, 03:44 PM
Cymru
Aug 23 2015, 03:14 PM
All this bandying about of terms and phrases such as "left-wing" and "unsound economics" referring to people and their ideas might make great sound bites but what do they actually mean?

How, for instance, are Corbyn's economic ideas any more economically unsound than others?

Quite:-

The letter:-

The accusation is widely made that Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters have moved to the extreme left on economic policy. But this is not supported by the candidate’s statements or policies.

His opposition to austerity is actually mainstream economics, even backed by the conservative IMF. He aims to boost growth and prosperity. He voted against the shameful £12bn in cuts in the welfare bill.

Despite the barrage of media coverage to the contrary, it is the current government’s policy and its objectives which are extreme. The attempt to produce a balanced public sector budget primarily through cuts to spending failed in the previous parliament. Increasing child poverty and cutting support for the most vulnerable is unjustifiable. Cutting government investment in the name of prudence is wrong because it prevents growth, innovation and productivity increases, which are all much needed by our economy, and so over time increases the debt due to lower tax receipts.

We the undersigned are not all supporters of Jeremy Corbyn. But we hope to clarify just where the “extremism” lies in the current economic debate.


That letter is far far from the 'backing' it is purported by some to be. It just says that some of his critics are equally as extreme

Well no shit Sherlock

The key sentence is this "We the undersigned are not all supporters of Jeremy Corbyn."

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Aug 24 2015, 08:00 AM
"Also there is no example in history of a successful Socialist economy"
Seems to be the killer point.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 24 2015, 11:11 AM
RJD
Aug 24 2015, 08:00 AM
"Also there is no example in history of a successful Socialist economy"
Seems to be the killer point.
Actually it isn't it's just another right wing non thinking response.

In right wing retard land socialism is North Korea, the Soviet Union or any number of failed South American states, in other words the extreme end of the spectrum, you rarely hear the present day right being compared to Nazi Germany or Argentina of the 70's do you? Because such claims are fatuous. The same applies to those who denigrate the former.

If you instead apply truthful arguments to this problem instead of knee jerk brain dead auto responses you start to get some clarity, Scandinavia has many socialist ideals and does very well in comparison to the tribal and fractured UK where greed has become good and considered normal. The post war Atlee government did DEMOCRATIC socialism and it's record speaks for itself.

Note. Having socialist tendancies does not indicate you'd like to see the return of Stalin or Pol Pot it simply means you'd like to see a fairer society where power and wealth is not concentrated in a few hands and the entire country dances to their tune to the detriment of the majority.

Did you notice how easy and straightforward that was? You can put your right wing newspaper down now because you have the information start to thinking for yourself once again! :)
Edited by Tigger, Aug 24 2015, 12:35 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 24 2015, 12:34 PM
you rarely hear the present day right being compared to Nazi Germany or Argentina of the 70's do you?
Change right to Tories and we will have to agree to disagree.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 24 2015, 12:34 PM
Did you notice how easy and straightforward that was? You can put your right wing newspaper down now because you have the information start to thinking for yourself once again! :)
Kind of unnecessary.

I guess we are back to what type of socialism we are talking about and then how you measure success. I like the idea of socialism (what decent person wouldn't) but don't see many successful examples around. I don't know much about the Atlee government but the world was different then so if it was good, good for Atlee but probably not much in the way of solutions for now.

As to Sweden it seems that socialism of that ilk comes with a lot of social engineering and political correctness that grates (as does economic inequality). The real fact is that most of the worlds economies are mixed economies and it's all a question of degree.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 24 2015, 12:34 PM
ACH1967
Aug 24 2015, 11:11 AM
RJD
Aug 24 2015, 08:00 AM
"Also there is no example in history of a successful Socialist economy"
Seems to be the killer point.
Actually it isn't it's just another right wing non thinking response.

In right wing retard land socialism is North Korea, the Soviet Union or any number of failed South American states, in other words the extreme end of the spectrum, you rarely hear the present day right being compared to Nazi Germany or Argentina of the 70's do you? Because such claims are fatuous. The same applies to those who denigrate the former.

If you instead apply truthful arguments to this problem instead of knee jerk brain dead auto responses you start to get some clarity, Scandinavia has many socialist ideals and does very well in comparison to the tribal and fractured UK where greed has become good and considered normal. The post war Atlee government did DEMOCRATIC socialism and it's record speaks for itself.

Note. Having socialist tendancies does not indicate you'd like to see the return of Stalin or Pol Pot it simply means you'd like to see a fairer society where power and wealth is not concentrated in a few hands and the entire country dances to their tune to the detriment of the majority.

Did you notice how easy and straightforward that was? You can put your right wing newspaper down now because you have the information start to thinking for yourself once again! :)
Usual ignorant pap. Scandinavia is not run on Socialist principles they have Capitalist economies. Yep there are Ferraris and expensive apartments in Stockholm and Copenhagen. The vast majority of businesses are owned privately and not by the State. The means of production are not under State controls or diktat. You clearly do not understand the meaning of that ism.

Your argument wrt to my claim that there is no history of a successful socialist country stands. Your attempt to shift the ground results from your inability to identify such. You cannot logical justify the actions of one group by pointing out that the actions of another were not acceptable. Bad logic, but that is the state of your mind, you are utterly and totally confused. Still thats what you get from a bog standard Compo education, so my sympathies.

As for Atlee the record does speak for itself as Thatcher had to dismantle the expensive inefficient colossus. During the period 1950 to 1985 there was greater social strife than there is today. That ended up with the Winter of Discontent and the UK labelled as the Poor Man of Europe with a basket-case economy. We, to paraphrase, "have never had it so good". "We" meaning the vast majority.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Aug 24 2015, 01:22 PM
Tigger
Aug 24 2015, 12:34 PM
ACH1967
Aug 24 2015, 11:11 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Actually it isn't it's just another right wing non thinking response.

In right wing retard land socialism is North Korea, the Soviet Union or any number of failed South American states, in other words the extreme end of the spectrum, you rarely hear the present day right being compared to Nazi Germany or Argentina of the 70's do you? Because such claims are fatuous. The same applies to those who denigrate the former.

If you instead apply truthful arguments to this problem instead of knee jerk brain dead auto responses you start to get some clarity, Scandinavia has many socialist ideals and does very well in comparison to the tribal and fractured UK where greed has become good and considered normal. The post war Atlee government did DEMOCRATIC socialism and it's record speaks for itself.

Note. Having socialist tendancies does not indicate you'd like to see the return of Stalin or Pol Pot it simply means you'd like to see a fairer society where power and wealth is not concentrated in a few hands and the entire country dances to their tune to the detriment of the majority.

Did you notice how easy and straightforward that was? You can put your right wing newspaper down now because you have the information start to thinking for yourself once again! :)
Usual ignorant pap. Scandinavia is not run on Socialist principles they have Capitalist economies. Yep there are Ferraris and expensive apartments in Stockholm and Copenhagen. The vast majority of businesses are owned privately and not by the State. The means of production are not under State controls or diktat. You clearly do not understand the meaning of that ism.

Your argument wrt to my claim that there is no history of a successful socialist country stands. Your attempt to shift the ground results from your inability to identify such. You cannot logical justify the actions of one group by pointing out that the actions of another were not acceptable. Bad logic, but that is the state of your mind, you are utterly and totally confused. Still thats what you get from a bog standard Compo education, so my sympathies.

As for Atlee the record does speak for itself as Thatcher had to dismantle the expensive inefficient colossus. During the period 1950 to 1985 there was greater social strife than there is today. That ended up with the Winter of Discontent and the UK labelled as the Poor Man of Europe with a basket-case economy. We, to paraphrase, "have never had it so good". "We" meaning the vast majority.

Are you saying there is something wrong with bog standard compo education?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 23 2015, 11:27 PM
You would have to ask the knob heads who are making him favourite. Perhaps starting with the members of the Stop the War Coalition ? ;D
So you think people who oppose an unjust, unjustifiable and possibly illegal war are, to use your words, "knob heads".

Interesting.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
RJD.
He is the favourite because he appeals to much of the body politics of Labour. There always has been the wannabe Communist, Militant Tendency and Spite n Envy Brigade in their ranks. They have just come out of their respective closets and surprised all with their numbers.
The ramblings of someone who is not a full shilling. ;D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 05:46 PM
C-too
Aug 23 2015, 11:27 PM
You would have to ask the knob heads who are making him favourite. Perhaps starting with the members of the Stop the War Coalition ? ;D
So you think people who oppose an unjust, unjustifiable and possibly illegal war are, to use your words, "knob heads".

Interesting.

All The Best
I'll tell you what is "interesting". Stop the War Coalition members and supporters, who cannot give an intelligent workable option to the invasion of Iraq. But who HIDE LIKE COWARDS behind the fact that war is an objectionable option that few people want.

If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 05:46 PM
C-too
Aug 23 2015, 11:27 PM
You would have to ask the knob heads who are making him favourite. Perhaps starting with the members of the Stop the War Coalition ? ;D
So you think people who oppose an unjust, unjustifiable and possibly illegal war are, to use your words, "knob heads".

Interesting.

All The Best
I'll tell you what is "interesting". Stop the War Coalition members and supporters, who cannot give an intelligent workable option to the invasion of Iraq. But who HIDE LIKE COWARDS behind the fact that war is an objectionable option that few people want.

If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.



Well one ' workable ' option would have been to retain parts of the Iraqi forces and police and some of the general adminstration.
The coalition had no plan of what to do once the war was 'won'.
I have said this before..if the area that you live in was devastated and left without infrastructure or law you would be robbed and killed within weeks and by now all of your nice friends and family would either be violent dirtbags or the slaves of violent dirtbags.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]

All are better qualified than the Chancellor is .. and probably have a better reputation for capability and honesty.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 24 2015, 01:04 PM
Kind of unnecessary.

Not at all, it was a comprehensive rebuttal of your rather lazy and unthinking response.

I could of course have backed this up by pointing out the self evident failure of Conservative and New Labour crony capitalism, which has succeeded in asset stripping the British economy, enriching the few and is in the process of destroying the middle classes, none of which bodes well for the future of this country no matter which bucket of sand you wish to to put your head in.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gansao
Aug 24 2015, 06:24 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 05:46 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I'll tell you what is "interesting". Stop the War Coalition members and supporters, who cannot give an intelligent workable option to the invasion of Iraq. But who HIDE LIKE COWARDS behind the fact that war is an objectionable option that few people want.

If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.

Well one ' workable ' option would have been to retain parts of the Iraqi forces and police and some of the general adminstration.
The coalition had no plan of what to do once the war was 'won'.
I have said this before..if the area that you live in was devastated and left without infrastructure or law you would be robbed and killed within weeks and by now all of your nice friends and family would either be violent dirtbags or the slaves of violent dirtbags.
That assumes that there was an invasion. I was asking for an option to the invasion.

Few people would disagree with you that keeping Iraqi forces would appear to have been the best thing to do. But that does not let the Iraqi/Shia Prime Minister completely off the hook in terms of responsibility for what happened after the invasion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Aug 24 2015, 01:22 PM
Usual ignorant pap. Scandinavia is not run on Socialist principles they have Capitalist economies. Yep there are Ferraris and expensive apartments in Stockholm and Copenhagen. The vast majority of businesses are owned privately and not by the State. The means of production are not under State controls or diktat. You clearly do not understand the meaning of that ism.


For someone who claims to have been a captain of industry you exhibit a considerable degree of intransigence and pig headed ignorance, you of course predictably failed to understand that socialism in Scandinavia has a conscience and is happily married to capitalism, not the sort of capitalism you'd recognise of course because your version beats it's wife, steals the money out of the kids piggy bank and craps all over the house when it gets pissed up on cheap credit.

LEARN to understand what democratic socialism is about instead of exhibiting wilful ignorance that does you few favours...........

File under can't understand simple concepts unless they fit into mind numbing cliches.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Aug 24 2015, 01:29 PM
Are you saying there is something wrong with bog standard compo education?
Well considering that this single O level numpty has skewered him on several occasions probably not! ;D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:37 PM
gansao
Aug 24 2015, 06:24 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Well one ' workable ' option would have been to retain parts of the Iraqi forces and police and some of the general adminstration.
The coalition had no plan of what to do once the war was 'won'.
I have said this before..if the area that you live in was devastated and left without infrastructure or law you would be robbed and killed within weeks and by now all of your nice friends and family would either be violent dirtbags or the slaves of violent dirtbags.
That assumes that there was an invasion. I was asking for an option to the invasion.

Few people would disagree with you that keeping Iraqi forces would appear to have been the best thing to do. But that does not let the Iraqi/Shia Prime Minister completely off the hook in terms of responsibility for what happened after the invasion.


Well the unbelievable incompetence and arrogance from the 3 stooges, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield ( and of course their bitch Blair) post Iraqi war must reflect on their competence pre Iraq war. You can argue the toss over whether they knew Saddam didnt have weapons of mass destruction but you cant dispute that he did not.
You can argue the toss as whether he sponsored terrorism but you cant dispute that he was no friend of Al qaeda.
Let's just say that there is not a great case for the war being impossible to avoid .
Of course the people of Iraq have to take some responsibilty in their conduct post war but that does not excuse the fact that the coalition left a power vacuum that would have led to violence even if it occurred in the UK.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Aug 24 2015, 06:28 PM
All are better qualified than the Chancellor is .. and probably have a better reputation for capability and honesty.
Ah, but would THEY be willing to take the flak and carry the can if it goes tits up, there are millions of people including myself who can run the world more efficiently from the comfort of an armchair, I do not see or hear of any respectable monetary/fiscal monitoring agency disagreeing with Osbournes course of actions thus far.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gansao
Aug 24 2015, 06:50 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:37 PM
gansao
Aug 24 2015, 06:24 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
That assumes that there was an invasion. I was asking for an option to the invasion.

Few people would disagree with you that keeping Iraqi forces would appear to have been the best thing to do. But that does not let the Iraqi/Shia Prime Minister completely off the hook in terms of responsibility for what happened after the invasion.


Well the unbelievable incompetence and arrogance from the 3 stooges, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield ( and of course their bitch Blair) post Iraqi war must reflect on their competence pre Iraq war. You can argue the toss over whether they knew Saddam didnt have weapons of mass destruction but you cant dispute that he did not.
You can argue the toss as whether he sponsored terrorism but you cant dispute that he was no friend of Al qaeda.
Let's just say that there is not a great case for the war being impossible to avoid .
Of course the people of Iraq have to take some responsibilty in their conduct post war but that does not excuse the fact that the coalition left a power vacuum that would have led to violence even if it occurred in the UK.
Hmm, hindsight, how clever of you. Are you clever enough to recognise how you diverted a perfectly reasonable request into an opportunity to offload your bigoted ramblings ? ;D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:59 PM
gansao
Aug 24 2015, 06:50 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:37 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep


Well the unbelievable incompetence and arrogance from the 3 stooges, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield ( and of course their bitch Blair) post Iraqi war must reflect on their competence pre Iraq war. You can argue the toss over whether they knew Saddam didnt have weapons of mass destruction but you cant dispute that he did not.
You can argue the toss as whether he sponsored terrorism but you cant dispute that he was no friend of Al qaeda.
Let's just say that there is not a great case for the war being impossible to avoid .
Of course the people of Iraq have to take some responsibilty in their conduct post war but that does not excuse the fact that the coalition left a power vacuum that would have led to violence even if it occurred in the UK.
Hmm, hindsight, how clever of you. Are you clever enough to recognise how you diverted a perfectly reasonable request into an opportunity to offload your bigoted ramblings ? ;D


I always know when you have no answer. You project your own bias at the person who handed you your arse back.
There is nothing bigoted about my post..what is more relevant is that there is nothing that you can refute.
The fact is that there was no immediate need to start the war and after the Iraqi military was overwhelmed the need of the Iraqi people was completely ignored by the victors.
I also think that bleating hindsight to refute the unrefutable fact that Saddam did not support the terrorists that carried out 9/11, did not have weapons of mass destruction and did not pose a threat to the US is pretty lame but predictable and trotted out by you on a regular basis. You should be asking yourself..if they did not know this why did they no know it?
But that would entail questioning the motives of your political pin up for colluding with the 3 stooges and love is blind..isnt it?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonksy
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Aug 23 2015, 07:26 PM
Tigger
Aug 23 2015, 07:15 PM
RJD
Aug 23 2015, 07:04 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I rarely bother to answer your questions as you already have set piece "answers" that simply trumpet your rigid ideology.

I just attempt to shine a light into places where there is none. I doubt I'm the only one in this country who is no longer fooled by boom and bust economics and the never ending search to find new ways to repeat the same economic problems time and time again.

We need something different because it is failing millions of decent people. Isn't one of you favourite cliche's something along the lines of not following the herd.......?
Yes agreed. If I have read a few of his postings, I've read them all.

Another cliche is the one about tribalism, yet he is the most tribalist of them all.

I for one, have had enough of this failed incompetent government, that seeks to repeat the same old mistakes of the 1980s.

Never mind we will get the same old, oft repeated lecture about lefties. If that's the case, what about the monumental cock-ups the right wingers who caused the recession, some eight years ago? And Scameron's bully boys are continuing its effects today, by punishing their whipping boys. Namely the poor and unemployed.
Once you have heard one tory you have heard them all..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM
If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.

Leave them to sort it out for themselves.

It was, and remains, none of our damn business.

We can not be the world-police, no nation can.

These nations have to want change bad enough to stand up and die for it themselves if that change is ever going to last.

We can't do it for them, because when we try we become just another oppressor, and this time a foreign one.

Shit, its almost like we learned nothing from the fuster-cluck that resulted from us messing in the middle-east with the British Mandate etc.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 10:20 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM
If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.

Leave them to sort it out for themselves.

It was, and remains, none of our damn business.

We can not be the world-police, no nation can.

These nations have to want change bad enough to stand up and die for it themselves if that change is ever going to last.

We can't do it for them, because when we try we become just another oppressor, and this time a foreign one.

Shit, its almost like we learned nothing from the fuster-cluck that resulted from us messing in the middle-east with the British Mandate etc.

All The Best
I will not disagree with that post, but to me it seems we have still not learned from past mistakes and we are in the process of mission creep and doing the same thing all over again and I bet there is no exit strategy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gansao
Aug 24 2015, 07:19 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:59 PM
gansao
Aug 24 2015, 06:50 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Hmm, hindsight, how clever of you. Are you clever enough to recognise how you diverted a perfectly reasonable request into an opportunity to offload your bigoted ramblings ? ;D


I always know when you have no answer. You project your own bias at the person who handed you your arse back.
There is nothing bigoted about my post..what is more relevant is that there is nothing that you can refute.
The fact is that there was no immediate need to start the war and after the Iraqi military was overwhelmed the need of the Iraqi people was completely ignored by the victors.
I also think that bleating hindsight to refute the unrefutable fact that Saddam did not support the terrorists that carried out 9/11, did not have weapons of mass destruction and did not pose a threat to the US is pretty lame but predictable and trotted out by you on a regular basis. You should be asking yourself..if they did not know this why did they no know it?
But that would entail questioning the motives of your political pin up for colluding with the 3 stooges and love is blind..isnt it?
I always expect you to deviate from the point in order to be able to spill your bile. And then you want to point an accusing finger at others. Your devious approach has become a source of amusement for me. ;D As too has your distorted one eyed view on events.

Incidentally, your bile shows how you beat yourself up over the invasion of Iraq. After the many unacceptable attacks by you on me, recognising how you beat yourself up is now a source of pleasure for me. ;D

Now how could I best describe your bile over Iraq, :rubchin: --- oh! --- of course, you are the original knicker wetter who has now taken to projecting that feeling onto others.



Edited by C-too, Aug 25 2015, 06:45 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 10:20 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM
If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.

Leave them to sort it out for themselves.

It was, and remains, none of our damn business.

We can not be the world-police, no nation can.

These nations have to want change bad enough to stand up and die for it themselves if that change is ever going to last.

We can't do it for them, because when we try we become just another oppressor, and this time a foreign one.

Shit, its almost like we learned nothing from the fuster-cluck that resulted from us messing in the middle-east with the British Mandate etc.

All The Best
Thanks for your opinion, unfortunately it ignores many of the realities of the situation so does not answer my request.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HIGHWAY
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 10:20 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM
If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.

Leave them to sort it out for themselves.

It was, and remains, none of our damn business.

We can not be the world-police, no nation can.

These nations have to want change bad enough to stand up and die for it themselves if that change is ever going to last.

We can't do it for them, because when we try we become just another oppressor, and this time a foreign one.

Shit, its almost like we learned nothing from the fuster-cluck that resulted from us messing in the middle-east with the British Mandate etc.

All The Best
Your wasting your time,yet again c2 has changed the topic on this thread,as it shows how much NL is hated.
So he does his usual trick of telling everyone there biased and that BL is/was great,unfortunately for him,he's in a group that's getting smaller and smaller
Mind you he will still be looking at his poster of TB above his bed saying its ok Tony I still love you
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 25 2015, 06:51 AM
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 10:20 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:17 PM
If you think I'm wrong then tell me what the intelligent workable option to sorting out the problem was.

Leave them to sort it out for themselves.

It was, and remains, none of our damn business.

We can not be the world-police, no nation can.

These nations have to want change bad enough to stand up and die for it themselves if that change is ever going to last.

We can't do it for them, because when we try we become just another oppressor, and this time a foreign one.

Shit, its almost like we learned nothing from the fuster-cluck that resulted from us messing in the middle-east with the British Mandate etc.

All The Best
Thanks for your opinion, unfortunately it ignores many of the realities of the situation so does not answer my request.

Be specific about which "realities" it fails to address and I will deal with them.

My guess is you won't because you are using that as an excuse to not attempt to rebut points I made because you know you can't.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Aug 24 2015, 06:29 PM
ACH1967
Aug 24 2015, 01:04 PM
Kind of unnecessary.

Not at all, it was a comprehensive rebuttal of your rather lazy and unthinking response.

I could of course have backed this up by pointing out the self evident failure of Conservative and New Labour crony capitalism, which has succeeded in asset stripping the British economy, enriching the few and is in the process of destroying the middle classes, none of which bodes well for the future of this country no matter which bucket of sand you wish to to put your head in.
The fact that you consider that a comprehensive rebuttal speaks volumes about your intellect but then for one so quit to resort to insults and vitriol for no good reason I guess it would be foolish to expect any better.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 25 2015, 07:59 AM
C-too
Aug 25 2015, 06:51 AM
Pro Veritas
Aug 24 2015, 10:20 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Thanks for your opinion, unfortunately it ignores many of the realities of the situation so does not answer my request.

Be specific about which "realities" it fails to address and I will deal with them.

My guess is you won't because you are using that as an excuse to not attempt to rebut points I made because you know you can't.

All The Best
Realities;

Saddam's invasion of Kuwait.
The need he created for the US, the UK and the French (who later opted out) to police no fly zones on the Iraqi air force in order to defend Kuwait. (and the Kurds)
His 12 year refusal to fully comply with the Ceasefire Agreement.
His 12 year refusal to fully cooperate with the UN Weapons Inspectors, thus making it impossible for them to do their job.
The period 1998 to 2002 when Saddam refused to allow UN Inspectors into Iraq.
The choice between continuing to allow Saddam to be free of weapons inspectors or to force him to allow them to return.
His known prohibited missile programmes taking place 1998/2002 including his Jinin project to produce missiles with a range more than six times greater than that allowed under the ceasefire agreement.
Saddam's willingness to use WMD in the past.
His breach of the Final Opportunity (UN res. 1441) to fully cooperate
His continued refusal to fully and proactively cooperate with the weapons inspectors, right up to the day of the invasion.

Each reality has a knock-on connection to all the others.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 25 2015, 10:01 AM
Realities;

1) Saddam's invasion of Kuwait.
2) The need he created for the US, the UK and the French (who later opted out) to police no fly zones on the Iraqi air force in order to defend Kuwait. (and the Kurds)
3) His 12 year refusal to fully comply with the Ceasefire Agreement.
4) His 12 year refusal to fully cooperate with the UN Weapons Inspectors, thus making it impossible for them to do their job.
5) The period 1998 to 2002 when Saddam refused to allow UN Inspectors into Iraq.
6) The choice between continuing to allow Saddam to be free of weapons inspectors or to force him to allow them to return.
7) His known prohibited missile programmes taking place 1998/2002 including his Jinin project to produce missiles with a range more than six times greater than that allowed under the ceasefire agreement.
8) Saddam's willingness to use WMD in the past.
9) His breach of the Final Opportunity (UN res. 1441) to fully cooperate
10) His continued refusal to fully and proactively cooperate with the weapons inspectors, right up to the day of the invasion.

Each reality has a knock-on connection to all the others.


1) None of our business: so theoretically I have just rebutted ALL of your subsequent points.

But I'll continue...

2) He didn't create that need, because 1) it was NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

3) So Saddam failed to comply with UNSCR 687 for 12 years. Do you want me to list the close to 226 UNSCR that Israel has refused to comply with? So, we should, following your thinking invade Israel and instigate regime change?

4) Erm, Israel - Nukes, 'nuff said.

5) See above.

6) The choice between allowing Israel to continue committing humanitarian atrocities or to force them to act in a legal and civilised manner.

7) Israel, nukes.

8) IDF using WP rounds against civilians.

9) See point 3.

10) Israel's ongoing refusal to allow independent investigation of alleged war crimes.


You hold views that are inconsistent. Saddam had to be slapped because he refused to comply with approx 40 odd UN resolutions. Israel has refused to comply with over 200 but you don't think we should force them to comply do you?

Is the reason we should have invaded Iraq but not Israel because Iraq was ruled by Arab Muslims, and Israel is ruled by Jews?

Because that really is all I can think can be behind your reasoning - Pro-Zionist racism.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 25 2015, 10:20 AM
1) None of our business: so theoretically I have just rebutted ALL of your subsequent points.
as a permanent UNSC member and ally of Kuwait it was very much our business

Quote:
 
3) So Saddam failed to comply with UNSCR 687 for 12 years. Do you want me to list the close to 226 UNSCR that Israel has refused to comply with? So, we should, following your thinking invade Israel and instigate regime change?
None of the UNSCR on Israel demand, require or allow us to take action. But the Iraq ones did all three

Quote:
 
4) Erm, Israel - Nukes, 'nuff said.
unproven and more importantly unused so two BIG differences



Those replies take out all your other points
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 25 2015, 10:20 AM
C-too
Aug 25 2015, 10:01 AM
Realities;

1) Saddam's invasion of Kuwait.
2) The need he created for the US, the UK and the French (who later opted out) to police no fly zones on the Iraqi air force in order to defend Kuwait. (and the Kurds)
3) His 12 year refusal to fully comply with the Ceasefire Agreement.
4) His 12 year refusal to fully cooperate with the UN Weapons Inspectors, thus making it impossible for them to do their job.
5) The period 1998 to 2002 when Saddam refused to allow UN Inspectors into Iraq.
6) The choice between continuing to allow Saddam to be free of weapons inspectors or to force him to allow them to return.
7) His known prohibited missile programmes taking place 1998/2002 including his Jinin project to produce missiles with a range more than six times greater than that allowed under the ceasefire agreement.
8) Saddam's willingness to use WMD in the past.
9) His breach of the Final Opportunity (UN res. 1441) to fully cooperate
10) His continued refusal to fully and proactively cooperate with the weapons inspectors, right up to the day of the invasion.

Each reality has a knock-on connection to all the others.


1) None of our business: so theoretically I have just rebutted ALL of your subsequent points.

But I'll continue...

2) He didn't create that need, because 1) it was NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

3) So Saddam failed to comply with UNSCR 687 for 12 years. Do you want me to list the close to 226 UNSCR that Israel has refused to comply with? So, we should, following your thinking invade Israel and instigate regime change?

4) Erm, Israel - Nukes, 'nuff said.

5) See above.

6) The choice between allowing Israel to continue committing humanitarian atrocities or to force them to act in a legal and civilised manner.

7) Israel, nukes.

8) IDF using WP rounds against civilians.

9) See point 3.

10) Israel's ongoing refusal to allow independent investigation of alleged war crimes.


You hold views that are inconsistent. Saddam had to be slapped because he refused to comply with approx 40 odd UN resolutions. Israel has refused to comply with over 200 but you don't think we should force them to comply do you?

Is the reason we should have invaded Iraq but not Israel because Iraq was ruled by Arab Muslims, and Israel is ruled by Jews?

Because that really is all I can think can be behind your reasoning - Pro-Zionist racism.

All The Best
That's probably the sort of simplistic approach that allows members of the 'stop the war coalition' to hide away from reality.

As I have said previously, you have the imaginative potential to write a good fictional novel.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:08 PM
Quote:
 
RJD.
He is the favourite because he appeals to much of the body politics of Labour. There always has been the wannabe Communist, Militant Tendency and Spite n Envy Brigade in their ranks. They have just come out of their respective closets and surprised all with their numbers.
The ramblings of someone who is not a full shilling. ;D
Clearly detail and insight is not your strong point, but the left always prefer simplicity over rigour. Just look at the mess they have made over the current election for a new Leader which is open, whoever wins, to a legal challenge. The only person here who is short on rivets is our resident self appointed NL Apologist who cannot see beyond the red rose end of the spectrum.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Aug 25 2015, 02:13 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:08 PM
Quote:
 
RJD.
He is the favourite because he appeals to much of the body politics of Labour. There always has been the wannabe Communist, Militant Tendency and Spite n Envy Brigade in their ranks. They have just come out of their respective closets and surprised all with their numbers.
The ramblings of someone who is not a full shilling. ;D
Clearly detail and insight is not your strong point, but the left always prefer simplicity over rigour. Just look at the mess they have made over the current election for a new Leader which is open, whoever wins, to a legal challenge. The only person here who is short on rivets is our resident self appointed NL Apologist who cannot see beyond the red rose end of the spectrum.
Clearly the floored voting system has given your assessment a by-pass. And your "spite n envy brigade" is just your way of defending/ignoring greed and arrogance.

If you weren't so innately bigoted you might begin to make a decent contribution to debates.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Aug 25 2015, 02:31 PM
RJD
Aug 25 2015, 02:13 PM
C-too
Aug 24 2015, 06:08 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepRJD
Clearly detail and insight is not your strong point, but the left always prefer simplicity over rigour. Just look at the mess they have made over the current election for a new Leader which is open, whoever wins, to a legal challenge. The only person here who is short on rivets is our resident self appointed NL Apologist who cannot see beyond the red rose end of the spectrum.
Clearly the floored voting system has given your assessment a by-pass. And your "spite n envy brigade" is just your way of defending/ignoring greed and arrogance.

If you weren't so innately bigoted you might begin to make a decent contribution to debates.
Not at all C2 I have proposed that ~£20b PA should be shifted from top to bottom, but you and your ilk are unprepared to say how this can be achieved in a sustainable manner without damaging the economy. However, you find it much easier to complain about the fact that those with capital and/or skills have done well for themselves over the last 20-30 years but those without have not. You want to imply this is just a UK phenomena, but it is not. You wish to imply that it is immoral, but it is not. You complain but from you and your ilk no solution, just it is all the fault of those nasty rich capitalists. Well that attitude lost your lot the last GE and leaves me to believe that your whinging is more to do with envy than any moral dung heap you believe you sit upon. There is a stench of spite and envy running through the body politics of the left and there always was.

Face the truth, there is a massive surplus of labour for low added value activities and open door inward migration will maintain such a massive surplus. So supply/demand will not force up wages for this group, only regulations will do that and Osborne has made such a commitment. Best you also recognise that this trend was sustained during the 13 years of NL misrule.
Face the truth that even during this last recession the demand for skilled labour exceeded supply.
We need more skilled people in the labour force, something totally neglected by a NL Gov.
Face the truth, NL totally neglected the manufacturing sector and as a consequence the first time in generations we not only saw a reduction in numbers employed by that sector we also saw a decline in added value. FullFact claim that during the 13 years of NL misrule it declined by ~£22b.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Aug 25 2015, 02:52 PM
Face the truth that even during this last recession the demand for skilled labour exceeded supply.
No, it didn't.

The short-termist-greed fed demand for cheap-skilled labour exceeded supply.

All The Best

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Aug 25 2015, 02:52 PM
C-too
Aug 25 2015, 02:31 PM
RJD
Aug 25 2015, 02:13 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepRJD
Clearly the floored voting system has given your assessment a by-pass. And your "spite n envy brigade" is just your way of defending/ignoring greed and arrogance.

If you weren't so innately bigoted you might begin to make a decent contribution to debates.
Not at all C2 I have proposed that ~£20b PA should be shifted from top to bottom, but you and your ilk are unprepared to say how this can be achieved in a sustainable manner without damaging the economy. However, you find it much easier to complain about the fact that those with capital and/or skills have done well for themselves over the last 20-30 years but those without have not. You want to imply this is just a UK phenomena, but it is not. You wish to imply that it is immoral, but it is not. You complain but from you and your ilk no solution, just it is all the fault of those nasty rich capitalists. Well that attitude lost your lot the last GE and leaves me to believe that your whinging is more to do with envy than any moral dung heap you believe you sit upon. There is a stench of spite and envy running through the body politics of the left and there always was.

Face the truth, there is a massive surplus of labour for low added value activities and open door inward migration will maintain such a massive surplus. So supply/demand will not force up wages for this group, only regulations will do that and Osborne has made such a commitment. Best you also recognise that this trend was sustained during the 13 years of NL misrule.
Face the truth that even during this last recession the demand for skilled labour exceeded supply.
We need more skilled people in the labour force, something totally neglected by a NL Gov.
Face the truth, NL totally neglected the manufacturing sector and as a consequence the first time in generations we not only saw a reduction in numbers employed by that sector we also saw a decline in added value. FullFact claim that during the 13 years of NL misrule it declined by ~£22b.

Again you give already discredited anti-NL propaganda, what makes your posts so unreadable is the continuous repetition of this rubbish. Especially when you misuse FACTS in order to mislead. There is no point in educating you because you ignore what you do not want to see. Although judging by the way your posts ease into changes suggests that you do read and understand sometimes, but your language suggests your don't really change from your original bigoted position.

I've just lost a post on your devious MO that included comments from your posts. I might re-do after a cuppa.
Edited by C-too, Aug 25 2015, 03:19 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply