Groups

    I Think I Hate This Country

    Banned
    "Why won't you shoot first and kill millions upon millions, and thus essentially become the first domino in the end of the world game"

    What?

    Why is the British public stupid? And why do middle aged men have a hard on for Call of Duty: Real Life Edition?

    Thank god for that woman in the audience who uttered what every sensible being thought: Why are people so gung-ho for nuking millions.

    Top comments

    It's ridiculous isn't it.

    Trigger happy 50-60 year old men with an obsession with the IRA and nuking millions of foreign children.

    Corbyn played a role in bringing both the Unionists and Nationalists to the table. Ian Paisley (Northern Ireland's first minister) who hated the Republicans kicked off and it was Corbyn who defended his right to voice despite apparently Corbyn being in bed with Sinn Fein...

    It's absurd and a none story. Over 20 years ago and Corbyn helped bring peace.


    And don't talk to me about nukes. Corbyn has campaigned for world peace his whole adult life. Have we not learned anything from the relatively small Bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? 140,000 instantly dead and diplomacy would have saved them all.

    He pretty much admitted he'd do a secondary strike but isn't going to openly admit it due to his decades of work on disarmament.
    Edited by: "dtovey89" 2nd Jun

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DBWRoqPXcAAaUTC.jpg

    dtovey89

    It's ridiculous isn't it. Trigger happy 50-60 year old men with an … It's ridiculous isn't it. Trigger happy 50-60 year old men with an obsession with the IRA and nuking millions of foreign children. Corbyn played a role in bringing both the Unionists and Nationalists to the table. Ian Paisley (Northern Ireland's first minister) who hated the Republicans kicked off and it was Corbyn who defended his right to voice despite apparently Corbyn being in bed with Sinn Fein... It's absurd and a none story. Over 20 years ago and Corbyn helped bring peace. And don't talk to me about nukes. Corbyn has campaigned for world peace his whole adult life. Have we not learned anything from the relatively small Bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? 140,000 instantly dead and diplomacy would have saved them all. He pretty much admitted he'd do a secondary strike but isn't going to openly admit it due to his decades of work on disarmament.



    For someone who claims to have done a degree in history you seem to have a very poor grasp of it.

    Jeremy Corbyn never helped the peace process. How many Unionists did he speak to? How many Loyalist funerals did he attend? How many leaders of the Loyalist Paramilitaries did he invite over?

    None, he did not bring both sides together as he only ever dealt with Republicans (fellow Marxists by the way).

    In 1984 the IRA tried to murder the entire elected British Government at Brighton. Within weeks of this happening Jeremy Corbyn was having tea with Sinn Fein and the IRA at Westminster. Think about that for a minute, the IRA tried to murder the elected government and a few weeks later are having a meeting with Jeremy Corbyn at the home of UK Democracy. Then again this was ok because they tried to kill "Fatcher" and her cabinet, all elected by the way.

    Now on to the end of World War 2. Negotiate with the Japanese after Iwo Jima? Where civilians were jumping off cliffs with their babies because of the brainwashing?

    Conservative estimates put the invasion of the main Japanese Islands at well over a million dead (both Japanese and Allied), some others projections said millions. The Japanese were conditioned to either fight or commit suicide. Diplomacy was never an option as Emperor Hirohito would see his people dead rather than surrender. Something was needed to break them, and the Atomic Bomb was it.

    The historical context and military realities of 1945 are often lost in … The historical context and military realities of 1945 are often lost in judging whether it was “necessary” for the United States to use nuclear weapons. The Japanese had been the aggressors, launching the war with a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 and subsequently systematically and flagrantly violating various international agreements and norms by employing biological and chemical warfare, torturing and murdering prisoners of war, and brutalizing civilians and forcing them to perform slave labor.



    So we are dealing with an enemy who breaks every rules of warfare, civilians were fair game for them as well us the use of Biological and Chemical agents.

    The losses between February and June 1945 just from the Allied invasions … The losses between February and June 1945 just from the Allied invasions of Iwo Jima and Okinawa were staggering: 18,000 dead and 78,000 wounded.



    Evidence that any invasion was going to result in massive casualties and loss of life.

    The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff estimated that an invasion of Japan’s home … The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff estimated that an invasion of Japan’s home islands would result in approximately 1.2 million American casualties, with 267,000 deaths. A study performed by physicist William Shockley for the staff of Secretary of War Henry Stimson estimated that the invasion of Japan would cost 1.7-4 million American casualties, including 400,000-800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese deaths. These fatality estimates were of course, in addition to those who had already perished during four long years of war; American deaths were already about 292,000. In other words, the invasion of Japan could have resulted in the death of twice as many Americans as had already been killed in the European, North African and Pacific theaters!



    So one study had American fatalities at over a quarter of a million, and goodness knows how many Japanese. The other a minimum of 400,000 US dead and 5 million Japanese.

    Historian and classicist Victor Davis Hanson has called attention to two … Historian and classicist Victor Davis Hanson has called attention to two factors that for both tactical and ethical reasons argued for the use of America's nuclear weapons against Japan. First, "thousands of Asians and allied prisoners were dying daily throughout the still-occupied Japanese Empire, and would do so as long as Japan was able to pursue the war. (Gideon Rose, the editor of the journal Foreign Affairs, has estimated that during every month of 1945 in which the war continued, Japanese forces were causing the deaths of between 100,000 and 250,000 noncombatants.)Second, according to Hanson, "Major General Curtis LeMay planned to move forces from the Marianas to newly conquered and much closer Okinawa, and the B-29 bombers, likely augmented by European bomber transfers after V-E Day, would have created a gargantuan fire-bombing air force that, with short-distance missions, would have done far more damage than the two nuclear bombs.”



    https://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2012/08/01/the-nuking-of-japan-was-a-tactical-and-moral-imperative/#59f078d3ca2d

    I'd say the Atom Bomb was definitely the lesser of two women evils.

    Finally no one is advocating firing nuclear weapons off. What is being asked that in the event of a war the Prime Minister fulfills their main duty; the protection of it's citizens. Throughout his rather undistinguished 30-plus-year political career Jeremy Corbyn has given the impression that he cares not one jot for the UK or it's people rather he likes to indulge in the worst kind of student politics.






    Edited by: "Liverpool_Bear" 3rd Jun

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    But what we do have is an opposition leader prepared to lump more debt … But what we do have is an opposition leader prepared to lump more debt onto the next generation. An opposition leader leveraging the politics of envy to undermine inward investment and punish people who have worked hard and done well for themselves.June 8th will be a good day for bodywork repairmen. More Labour supporters out on the street will invariably lead to more expensive cars being keyed because 'it's just not faaaaaair'.



    Oh my word! You're getting as bad as Theresa May for the soundbites!

    "Inward investment"

    Paying "down the deficit"

    Lumping "more debt!"

    Have a day off, will you!?

    299 Comments

    ? oO

    somebody call somebody

    well, throw the digital games away and live for real with real people (may be not too often here)

    Original Poster Banned

    kester76

    ? oO


    Question time general election special: Stupid people vs Corbyn. Basically, a bunch of tory lovers thought the most pressing question facing our country is our ability in ending the world first. Trump logic at its finest.

    You're bang on - thank goodness she spoke up before she asked her own question.

    It's ridiculous isn't it.

    Trigger happy 50-60 year old men with an obsession with the IRA and nuking millions of foreign children.

    Corbyn played a role in bringing both the Unionists and Nationalists to the table. Ian Paisley (Northern Ireland's first minister) who hated the Republicans kicked off and it was Corbyn who defended his right to voice despite apparently Corbyn being in bed with Sinn Fein...

    It's absurd and a none story. Over 20 years ago and Corbyn helped bring peace.


    And don't talk to me about nukes. Corbyn has campaigned for world peace his whole adult life. Have we not learned anything from the relatively small Bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? 140,000 instantly dead and diplomacy would have saved them all.

    He pretty much admitted he'd do a secondary strike but isn't going to openly admit it due to his decades of work on disarmament.
    Edited by: "dtovey89" 2nd Jun

    it was if they weren't happy with just the ordinary bombs we drop on them, "lets nuke them".
    I'm sure a few tactical bombs on a site, would destroy any potential nuclear threat in the future, if one occurred. nip it in the bud, so to speak

    We have one life. We will come and we will go. Millions are born everyday and millions die everyday, and yet the earth keeps spinning. Don't let another's thinking ruin your day. Everyone has their own point of view, so just do what makes you happy and ignore what doesn't

    dtovey89

    140,000 instantly dead and diplomacy would have saved them all.



    That's not accurate in the slightest. Go read the testimonies and stories from the Japanese generals.

    It was an act used to prevent a land war that would've drawn the war out and potentially killed many more.

    Just to explain the nuclear deterrent, it's not a deterrent if you're not prepared to use it. Pretty simple really.

    First strike attacks would be in extreme circumstances where you kill thousands in order to save millions.

    It's not an easy choice, in fact it's the toughest choice a leader would ever have to make. Corbyn doesn't want to make that choice. He rejects the world as it is and lives in a fantasy one where nuclear weapons aren't a reality.

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    That's not accurate in the slightest. Go read the testimonies and stories … That's not accurate in the slightest. Go read the testimonies and stories from the Japanese generals. It was an act used to prevent a land war that would've drawn the war out and potentially killed many more.



    The Japanese Empire and Government were a week away from surrendering.

    There were a few rogue generals who were going to fight until destruction
    but they were increasingly isolated.

    Furthermore, if you view Hiroshima as justified then Nagasaki most certainly wasn't.

    Shame on you.

    Original Poster Banned

    revo89

    We have one life. We will come and we will go. Millions are born … We have one life. We will come and we will go. Millions are born everyday and millions die everyday, and yet the earth keeps spinning. Don't let another's thinking ruin your day. Everyone has their own point of view, so just do what makes you happy and ignore what doesn't


    This leads to apathy, which leads to idiots like Trump and evil wrenches like May to win the top spot, which leads to people (usually always the poorest and most vulnerable) to suffer.

    Who thinks the MP's pay rises should be inline with nurses pay rise?! I so wanted to put that question to May!!!

    dtovey89

    The Japanese Empire and Government were a week away from surrendering. … The Japanese Empire and Government were a week away from surrendering. There were a few rogue generals who were going to fight until destruction but they were increasingly isolated. Furthermore, if you view Hiroshima as justified then Nagasaki most certainly wasn't. Shame on you.



    My God man you present yourself as an authority on a subject that you're clearly not, because it fits your anti-nuclear narrative.

    Once again you use victims to try and 'shame' (subtle use of the word there because it wasn't clear which of your usual tactics you were deploying X) ) someone because you have nothing substantial to say.

    You're entering into a debate that has raged for 70 years unarmed.

    Whole thing has gone from ICM to ICBM
    http://bestanimations.com/Military/Explosions/atomic-mushroom-cloud-explosion-2-2.gif

    But what we do have is an opposition leader prepared to lump more debt onto the next generation. An opposition leader leveraging the politics of envy to undermine inward investment and punish people who have worked hard and done well for themselves.

    June 8th will be a good day for bodywork repairmen. More Labour supporters out on the street will invariably lead to more expensive cars being keyed because 'it's just not faaaaaair'.

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    My God man you present yourself as an authority on a subject that you're … My God man you present yourself as an authority on a subject that you're clearly not, because it fits your anti-nuclear narrative.Once again you use victims to try and 'shame' (subtle use of the word there because it wasn't clear which of your usual tactics you were deploying X) ) someone because you have nothing substantial to say.You're entering into a debate that has raged for 70 years unarmed.



    Truman was a war criminal.

    There's nothing wrong with what I've stated and the general consensus amongst scholars is that the USA did not need to drop one atomic bomb let alone two.

    Japan was on the verge of defeat and was only a few southern isolated islands causing any real concern to the US military.

    There's a reason why such a weapon has never been used since.

    Original Poster Banned

    Wongy110

    Whole thing has gone from ICM to ICBM


    Honestly, I don't think the three middle aged men in that audience realise what nukes actually do? Or realise that China has a no first-strike policy and yet weirdly enough no one is threatening to lob a nuke at them.

    I couldn't believe how many in the audience were shocked to hear he wouldn't strike first. I mean if the worst thing about Corbyn is that he won't push the button, then surely that's a good thing. Good on the girl in the audience for speaking up and talking some sense

    Edward_Nigma

    I couldn't believe how many in the audience were shocked to hear he … I couldn't believe how many in the audience were shocked to hear he wouldn't strike first. I mean if the worst thing about Corbyn is that he won't push the button, then surely that's a good thing. Good on the girl in the audience for speaking up and talking some sense



    Yes, and also notice how the crowd cheered her and got increasingly bored with the nuclear perverts in the crowd asking the same ****.

    dtovey89

    Truman was a war criminal. There's nothing wrong with what I've stated … Truman was a war criminal. There's nothing wrong with what I've stated and the general consensus amongst scholars is that the USA did not need to drop one atomic bomb let alone two. Japan was on the verge of defeat and was only a few southern isolated islands causing any real concern to the US military. There's a reason why such a weapon has never been used since.



    It's not the 'general consensus' at all. Don't speak about scholar when you could name few and have read even less. That's not to say you couldn't have read some of these books - you always 'coulda' done something.

    The reason it's not been used since is because we've not been in a fully-fledged world war that required it, but we came close. It was MAD that prevented us from destroying the world in the 1960s (that bit in the X-Men film with McAvoy was based on a real thing).

    But MAD only works if you have a person prepared to use the nukes. Corbyn refusing to commit to it undermines the nuclear deterrent.

    But does that stop anyone else from having nukes? Is Britain so influential on the world stage that by getting rid of nukes Putin, Trump et al will suddenly see the light?

    What's with these grumpy old men?
    See, the dangers of not venting your post retirement frustrations on a lump of old wood in the shed (oO). You become a sociopath.

    Edward_Nigma

    I couldn't believe how many in the audience were shocked to hear he … I couldn't believe how many in the audience were shocked to hear he wouldn't strike first. I mean if the worst thing about Corbyn is that he won't push the button, then surely that's a good thing. Good on the girl in the audience for speaking up and talking some sense



    Within the decade, many analysts believe it's conceivable that North Korea will have the ability to launch a nuclear weapon that may well reach us.

    That may require us to strike first, killing thousands to save millions.

    It's the worst-case scenario but PMs have to be prepared for them. Corbyn has said he wouldn't because he'd rather talk to the North Korean leader. That is.....problematic.

    dtovey89

    Yes, and also notice how the crowd cheered her and got increasingly bored … Yes, and also notice how the crowd cheered her and got increasingly bored with the nuclear perverts in the crowd asking the same ****.


    Yes at least she got a bigger cheer than the other muppets

    let's put the question out there because there are so many with the answer but they obviously don't know the question.

    If someone pressed the button against us would you press the button?

    That was the question and like many on here the woman was against it. Corbyn wouldn't answer.

    So we all just sit and don't retaliate really you are all happy with that. The nuclear option is a deterrent, someone will use it if they think you won't retaliate as we saw all through the Cold War, but saying you won't use it then.,,.

    No one wants to press the button but that's all Corbyn focused dodging the actual question.

    That's why the audience did what they did.
    Edited by: "eslick" 2nd Jun

    eslick

    let's put the question out there because there are so many with the … let's put the question out there because there are so many with the answer but they obviously don't know the question. If someone pressed the button against us would you press the button? That was the question and like many on here the woman was against it. Corbyn wouldn't answer. So we all just sit and don't retaliate really you are all happy with that. No one wants to press the button but that's all Corbyn focused dodging the actual question. That's why the audience did what they did.



    Labour supporters seem to have a problem with complex notions, particularly that something could be bad but also necessary and the right thing to do.

    How can I explain this in terms my youngest would understand? Here goes...

    medicine doesn't taste good, but when you've got a bad tum tum, it makes it all better.

    Something that is superficially (I don't use this word with children obviously) bad is actually done for the right reasons.

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    But what we do have is an opposition leader prepared to lump more debt … But what we do have is an opposition leader prepared to lump more debt onto the next generation. An opposition leader leveraging the politics of envy to undermine inward investment and punish people who have worked hard and done well for themselves.June 8th will be a good day for bodywork repairmen. More Labour supporters out on the street will invariably lead to more expensive cars being keyed because 'it's just not faaaaaair'.



    Oh my word! You're getting as bad as Theresa May for the soundbites!

    "Inward investment"

    Paying "down the deficit"

    Lumping "more debt!"

    Have a day off, will you!?

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    It's not the 'general consensus' at all. Don't speak about scholar when … It's not the 'general consensus' at all. Don't speak about scholar when you could name few and have read even less. That's not to say you couldn't have read some of these books - you always 'coulda' done something.The reason it's not been used since is because we've not been in a fully-fledged world war that required it, but we came close. It was MAD that prevented us from destroying the world in the 1960s (that bit in the X-Men film with McAvoy was based on a real thing).But MAD only works if you have a person prepared to use the nukes. Corbyn refusing to commit to it undermines the nuclear deterrent.But does that stop anyone else from having nukes? Is Britain so influential on the world stage that by getting rid of nukes Putin, Trump et al will suddenly see the light?



    I'm not professing to be an expert on the subject but it formed part of one of the modules in my final year as a undergraduate studying History.

    Im not going to go in the loft and dig through my collection of Uni books to start finding you sources as your aren't worth the effort. However, from what I recall over many hours of extensive reading was the the use of Atomic weapons on Hiroshima was overkill. The Japanese were weeks away from surrendering and it was only down to their obsession with pride that they took so long to announce a surrender. The fact that the Emperor publicly announced it despite never doing a public announcement before says it all.

    Also, your comment on MAD is completely irrelevant in regards to Japan as 1945 was completely different to 1960s. The US were the only nation with atomic power in the 1940s. To use it against a nation that had only been industrialised for under half a century was nothing short of genocide.

    The Cuban Missile Crisis in 62 was the closest the world came to destruction and the nuclear arsenal of the time was a lot more threatening than in 45. But it wasn't prevented due to America using A-Bombs some two decades before. It was due to the diplomacy of JFK and Krushchev.

    Corbyn didn't state he wouldn't use them. He refused to do a first strike. Granted he was very reluctant to admit to doing a retaliatory strike (imagine if he downright said it the media would paint him as a hypocrite) but he did tell that fool he wouldn't let North Korea or Iran get away with just nuking us.
    Edited by: "dtovey89" 2nd Jun

    Curlyman83

    Oh my word! You're getting as bad as Theresa May for the … Oh my word! You're getting as bad as Theresa May for the soundbites!"Inward investment"Paying "down the deficit"Lumping "more debt!"Have a day off, will you!?



    Look at me caring about the economy for myself and my kids. It's almost like I have a job, investments and responsibilities.

    HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

    Within the decade, many analysts believe it's conceivable that North … Within the decade, many analysts believe it's conceivable that North Korea will have the ability to launch a nuclear weapon that may well reach us.That may require us to strike first, killing thousands to save millions. It's the worst-case scenario but PMs have to be prepared for them. Corbyn has said he wouldn't because he'd rather talk to the North Korean leader. That is.....problematic.



    Crikey!! Corbyn might actually want to 'talk' to a foreign leader!! Quick, somebody inform the electorate! We can't afford to have this madman in charge of our sovereign nation!!

    dtovey89

    I'm not professing to be an expert on the subject but it formed part of … I'm not professing to be an expert on the subject but it formed part of one of the modules in my final year as a undergraduate studying History.Im not going to go in the loft and dig through my collection of Uni books to start finding you sources as your aren't worth the effort. However, from what I recall over many hours of extensive reading was the the use of Atomic weapons on Hiroshima was overkill. The Japanese were weeks away from surrendering and it was only down to their obsession with pride that they took so long to announce a surrender. The fact that the Emperor publicly announced it despite never doing a public announcement before says it all. Also, your comment on MAD is completely irrelevant in regards to Japan as 1945 was completely different to 1960s. The US were the only nation with atomic power in the 1940s. To use it against a nation that had only been industrialised for under half a century was nothing short of genocide. The Cuban Missile Crisis in 62 was the closest the world came to destruction and the nuclear arsenal of the time was a lot more threatening than in 45. But it wasn't prevented due to America using A-Bombs some two decades before. It was due to the diplomacy of JFK and Krushchev. Corbyn didn't state he wouldn't use them. He refused to do a first strike. Granted he was very reluctant to admit to doing a retaliatory strike (imagine if he downright said it the media would paint him as a hypocrite) but he did tell that fool he wouldn't let North Korea or Iran get away with just nuking us.




    Yes he did he wouldn't answer the question, when DD asked him if he had a response to one that asked he said no.

    Curlyman83

    Oh my word! You're getting as bad as Theresa May for the … Oh my word! You're getting as bad as Theresa May for the soundbites!"Inward investment"Paying "down the deficit"Lumping "more debt!"Have a day off, will you!?



    Just ignore him

    dtovey89

    I'm not professing to be an expert on the subject but it formed part of … I'm not professing to be an expert on the subject but it formed part of one of the modules in my final year as a undergraduate studying History.Im not going to go in the loft and dig through my collection of Uni books to start finding you sources as your aren't worth the effort. However, from what I recall over many hours of extensive reading was the the use of Atomic weapons on Hiroshima was overkill. The Japanese were weeks away from surrendering and it was only down to their obsession with pride that they took so long to announce a surrender. The fact that the Emperor publicly announced it despite never doing a public announcement before says it all. Also, your comment on MAD is completely irrelevant in regards to Japan as 1945 was completely different to 1960s. The US were the only nation with atomic power in the 1940s. To use it against a nation that had only been industrialised for under half a century was nothing short of genocide. The Cuban Missile Crisis in 62 was the closest the world came to destruction and the nuclear arsenal of the time was a lot more threatening than in 45. But it wasn't prevented due to America using A-Bombs some two decades before. It was due to the diplomacy of JFK and Krushchev. Corbyn didn't state he wouldn't use them. He refused to do a first strike. Granted he was very reluctant to admit to doing a retaliatory strike (imagine if he downright said it the media would paint him as a hypocrite) but he did tell that fool he wouldn't let North Korea or Iran get away with just nuking us.



    Yeah, apprenticeship would've been a better use of time if that's what you got from uni.

    My comment about MAD was directly in relation to the 1960s. It's perfectly clear from what I wrote. Here, I won't even make you scroll up because 'I'm not worth it'.

    It was MAD that prevented us from destroying the world in the 1960s (that bit in the X-Men film with McAvoy was based on a real thing).


    dtovey89

    Corbyn didn't state he wouldn't use them. He refused to do a first … Corbyn didn't state he wouldn't use them. He refused to do a first strike. Granted he was very reluctant to admit to doing a retaliatory strike (imagine if he downright said it the media would paint him as a hypocrite) but he did tell that fool he wouldn't let North Korea or Iran get away with just nuking us.



    Reluctant to even commit to a retaliatory strike is one thing, refusing to commit to using them in any circumstance is another. He wants nuclear disarmament as does everyone, but that ain't going to happen.

    Corbyn has to view the world as it is, not how he wants it to be.

    eslick

    Yes he did he wouldn't answer the question, when DD asked him if he had a … Yes he did he wouldn't answer the question, when DD asked him if he had a response to one that asked he said no.



    Because it was the same question being asked for a fifth time.

    He's got under 90 minutes to talk about tax, public services, Brexit, etc

    And you've got 4 or 5 fools in the crowd wasting up to 15 minutes talking about the IRA and 4 million being sent to North Korea.

    Project Fear in full flow. How many times did May name drop Dianne Abbot. It was embarrassing.

    From what I saw Corbyn managed to win over the two guys who asked questions about micro businesses. Much more relevant questions.

    Original Poster Banned

    eslick

    let's put the question out there because there are so many with the … let's put the question out there because there are so many with the answer but they obviously don't know the question. If someone pressed the button against us would you press the button? That was the question and like many on here the woman was against it. Corbyn wouldn't answer. So we all just sit and don't retaliate really you are all happy with that. No one wants to press the button but that's all Corbyn focused dodging the actual question. That's why the audience did what they did.



    ​They asked about first strike and counterstrike. And the audience was already intending to do what they did regardless of Corbyn's answer, but he did himself no favours.

    For first strike, wanting your leader to be pro-active in ending the world is bordering disturbing. Again, even bloody China wants no part of that and they seem to be doing ok with regards to security.

    And if someone struck us, again, that's the end anyway. But I suppose our scorched skeletons can nod away all proud in the knowledge that we at least shot one off in the nuclear war that ended humanity. Good stuff.

    People don't seem to realise it doesn't end in nukes from one country going one way and nukes from the targeted country going another. It's a domino effect. The end.
    Edited by: "neilanderton1" 2nd Jun

    dtovey89

    Because it was the same question being asked for a fifth time. He's got … Because it was the same question being asked for a fifth time. He's got under 90 minutes to talk about tax, public services, Brexit, etcAnd you've got 4 or 5 fools in the crowd wasting up to 15 minutes talking about the IRA and 4 million being sent to North Korea. Project Fear in full flow. How many times did May name drop Dianne Abbot. It was embarrassing. From what I saw Corbyn managed to win over the two guys who asked questions about micro businesses. Much more relevant questions.




    Let's be pedantic he was there to answer questions he was asked the question and didn't answer, even after being pushed. good job as usual by a politician.

    Let me answer it for you, he wouldn't and we would all be dead now



    jaybizzle




    And here is an excellent example of Propaganda in action, I suggest anyone who missed the program watch it on iPlayer to see what utter nonsense this post is.

    Original Poster Banned

    eslick

    Let's be pedantic he was there to answer questions he was asked the … Let's be pedantic he was there to answer questions he was asked the question and didn't answer, even after being pushed. good job as usual by a politician. Let me answer it for you, he wouldn't and we would all be dead now



    ​We'd all be dead anyway. Nuclear war has no winners.

    eslick

    Let's be pedantic he was there to answer questions he was asked the … Let's be pedantic he was there to answer questions he was asked the question and didn't answer, even after being pushed. good job as usual by a politician. Let me answer it for you, he wouldn't and we would all be dead now



    I think he did answer the question you think he did not but let's face it whats worse not answering or lying

    neilanderton1

    They asked about first strike and counterstrike. And the audience was … They asked about first strike and counterstrike. And the audience was already intending to do what they did regardless of Corbyn's answer, but he did himself no favours.For first strike, wanting your leader to be pro-active in ending the world is bordering disturbing. Again, even bloody China wants no part of that and they seem to be doing ok with regards to security.And if someone struck us, again, that's the end anyway. But I suppose our scorched skeletons can nod away all proud in the knowledge that we at least shot one off in the nuclear war that ended humanity. Good stuff.




    He only had to say no, we all would have thought better of him for doing so. But sadly he went quiet which none of us really want.
    Post a comment
    Avatar
    @
      Text
      Top Discussions
      1. Surprise! The HUKD Summer Flamedeer Hunt 2017 **OFFICIAL THREAD** (trading …4522112
      2. Are these two things distinctly different to you?35195
      3. Who's getting the Xbox X Scorpio? 60 day satisfaction1334
      4. ❅☁☁❅ I want☼to talk☼about the☔WEATHER☔no politics☃no religion❅☁☁❅18846346

      See more discussions