Jump to content


The Labour Party. All discussion here please

Vaati

This is the final warning we are going to give about bickering, name calling etc. If a post breaks the forum rules, report it. Any further and accounts will be suspended.

Message added by Vaati

Recommended Posts

Not surprised! People on here don't like UKIP - or maybe they are a threat to the "establishment"???

 

Its not a matter of not liking UKIP, in fact Farage and co have done a very good job in putting the wind up the big parties and getting them to focus on the issues that bother the citizens of the UK, namely the EU and immigration.

 

The fact is they cannot form the next government. A vote for them instead of for Cameron allows Milliband and his increasingly loonie left near to power.

 

A vote for them actually makes a referendum less likely as the only politician guaranteeing a referendum is Cameron.

 

Please don't remind me that he promised one before the last election, he did, but he did not win the last election, he is in a coalition and the Liberals would not have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its not a matter of not liking UKIP, in fact Farage and co have done a very good job in putting the wind up the big parties and getting them to focus on the issues that bother the citizens of the UK, namely the EU and immigration.

 

The fact is they cannot form the next government. A vote for them instead of for Cameron allows Milliband and his increasingly loonie left near to power.

 

A vote for them actually makes a referendum less likely as the only politician guaranteeing a referendum is Cameron.

 

Please don't remind me that he promised one before the last election, he did, but he did not win the last election, he is in a coalition and the Liberals would not have it.

 

Agree with what you say Alan whole heartedly BUT . . .

He will be in a coalition this time as well so we won't get the "guaranteed" referendum in 2017 either.

Maybe UKIP won't form the next government, but I'm just hoping they have a say in it. Certainly I don't want Labour getting in!!!

When I said people don't like UKIP I was meaning the Sheffield Forum generally!

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree with what you say Alan whole heartedly BUT . . .

He will be in a coalition this time as well so we won't get the "guaranteed" referendum in 2017 either.

Maybe UKIP won't form the next government, but I'm just hoping they have a say in it. Certainly I don't want Labour getting in!!!

When I said people don't like UKIP I was meaning the Sheffield Forum generally!

 

:)

 

Im afraid that with some of our pals her on the forum we are dealing with closed minds. It is literally true that if you put a monkey up for the labour party it would get in.

 

Personally I vote for competence, and Cameron has proved to me that he is the best man for the job at the moment.

 

I dont think the labour party has ever been in such a poor state and I include Michael Foots period in that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And are you really suggesting that if a Republican president had come to a Conservative Prime Minister, a year or so after 9/11, and asked for support for an invasion, they wouldn't have done whatever was necessary to provide that support?

 

All theoretical though isn't it? The Tories weren't in power, Labour were. The Tories didn't cook up any "dodgy dossiers", Labour did. The blame lies fairly and squarely on Labour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks that way. But the lies failed to convince those 84 Labour MPs, or any LibDems or Nationalists, or the millions of people who demonstrated against the invasion. Whereas they did convince all but 2 of the Tories/Unionists (and of course the 254 Labour/New Labour MPs who voted for it, to their shame). Are you saying that they're more gullible than the rest of us?

 

And are you really suggesting that if a Republican president had come to a Conservative Prime Minister, a year or so after 9/11, and asked for support for an invasion, they wouldn't have done whatever was necessary to provide that support?

 

I don't think they were gullible, it was clearly going to be an unpopular war, the UN had refused support, the French and others, rightly as it turned out, had refused to become involved. But, as I stated above when a British PM, of any party, gets to his feet in the House of Commons and claims that he is in possession of absolute proof that WMD were present and could be deployed within 45 minutes, there is a huge motivation to support him.

 

Regarding your question about involvement after 9/11. Heath would have needed a lot of proof, Thatcher less so, and would have tried to support, but I doubt she would have lied to parliament. She would also have been a far better foil to an idiot like Bush than Blair was. Major would never have lied to parliament about such an issue he was politically weak and would have been ousted like lightning by his own side as soon as the opportunity presented itself.

 

But this is speculation, the fact remains that Blair DID lie, like the labour party crashed the economy we can speculate what a tory government would have done, but there wasn't one at the time.

 

Its too important to play the game of what might have been. Labour have been a disaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All theoretical though isn't it? The Tories weren't in power, Labour were. The Tories didn't cook up any "dodgy dossiers", Labour did. The blame lies fairly and squarely on Labour.

 

No but they wanted to send arms to and train IS terrorists in their battle against Assad in Syria, until the british public said no. Hague was shuffled sideways. Last week Cameron said he wanted to train the right type of rebels in Syria. You couldn't make it up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS and public sector is not safe with the Tories. They are ideologically programmed to destroy the Public Sector. Started under Thatcher, with the minimal state, deregulation (financial sector, Banks, the real enemy within) Silly bloody New Labour followed the mantra of trickle down economics. Thatcher, IEA,Hayek, Freedman etc. The top Tories probably don't even use the NHS, send their kids to Public schools, most of the Cabinet are Public school educated but remember "we're all in it together"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No but they wanted to send arms to and train IS terrorists in their battle against Assad in Syria, until the british public said no. Hague was shuffled sideways. Last week Cameron said he wanted to train the right type of rebels in Syria. You couldn't make it up

 

It's a good point. I don't think you should ever underestimate the vanity and ego of politicians. MP's of both sides were saying that our "standing in the international community" would be reduced if we didn't help bring down the Assad regime. Well sod that.

About the only good thing that Miliband has done was to stop us getting involved in a war against Syria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The NHS and public sector is not safe with the Tories. They are ideologically programmed to destroy the Public Sector. Started under Thatcher, with the minimal state, deregulation (financial sector, Banks, the real enemy within) Silly bloody New Labour followed the mantra of trickle down economics. Thatcher, IEA,Hayek, Freedman etc. The top Tories probably don't even use the NHS, send their kids to Public schools, most of the Cabinet are Public school educated but remember "we're all in it together"

 

I keep hearing people say the Torys will do damage to the NHS, but they never give examples, just their theories of what will happen post election. Can you give examples of how the present government (ie the one looking for re-election) has damaged the NHS in the last 5 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The NHS and public sector is not safe with the Tories. They are ideologically programmed to destroy the Public Sector. Started under Thatcher, with the minimal state, deregulation (financial sector, Banks, the real enemy within) Silly bloody New Labour followed the mantra of trickle down economics. Thatcher, IEA,Hayek, Freedman etc. The top Tories probably don't even use the NHS, send their kids to Public schools, most of the Cabinet are Public school educated but remember "we're all in it together"

 

Because no Labour MP never has or would?

Edited by truman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because no Labour MP never has or would?

 

I have never understood the whole "they went to Public school" argument. Don't you want the best people for the job? Don't public schools generally give a better level of eduction to their pupils?

 

The whole argument is just reverse snobbery and those who perpetrate it would rather have someone less skilled who comes from a similar background as them running the country, than a more skilled person who comes from a family with more money than they. They don't want the best person for the job. Its complete madness!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

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.