Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Theresa May calls General Election for June 8


Still Waters
 Share

Recommended Posts

Regarding the nuclear deterrent, as we already have a nuclear force it would seem uneconomic not to maintain our capability, as I'm sure it would be even more expensive to build up a new nuclear force from scratch at some point in the future, provided that Team America  - World Police would allow us to build a nuclear force from scratch if we'd gotten rid of the current one (sarcasm).

Using a nuclear option? if you're responsible for the use of the nuclear option, when would you consider actively using it. If you have been attacked by a foreign regime you might consider it, but your retaliatory strike would kill many thousands of ordinary people who are just trying to get on with their lives and for the most part try not to think of the government. I imagine the great majority of people the world over get up in the morning and concern themselves with earning the money to pay the bills, their governments foreign policy merely something that gets mentioned on breakfast TV as they eat their toast, would you be prepared to kill thousands in order to attack a few?

Seems to me that any potential leader who can unequivocally state that they would have no hesitation in launching a nuclear strike, shouldn't be in a position where they can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stevewinn said:

Theresa May as balls the size of space hoppers.

 

She certainly has unusually large feet, look at the size of her shoes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, EBE Hybrid said:

Regarding the nuclear deterrent, as we already have a nuclear force it would seem uneconomic not to maintain our capability, as I'm sure it would be even more expensive to build up a new nuclear force from scratch at some point in the future, provided that Team America  - World Police would allow us to build a nuclear force from scratch if we'd gotten rid of the current one (sarcasm).

Using a nuclear option? if you're responsible for the use of the nuclear option, when would you consider actively using it. If you have been attacked by a foreign regime you might consider it, but your retaliatory strike would kill many thousands of ordinary people who are just trying to get on with their lives and for the most part try not to think of the government. I imagine the great majority of people the world over get up in the morning and concern themselves with earning the money to pay the bills, their governments foreign policy merely something that gets mentioned on breakfast TV as they eat their toast, would you be prepared to kill thousands in order to attack a few?

Seems to me that any potential leader who can unequivocally state that they would have no hesitation in launching a nuclear strike, shouldn't be in a position where they can. 

What about all the ordinary UK citizens who'd have already lost their lives? and that's before we consider the collapse of society and economy of the UK. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Torchwood said:

I personally agree with Sir Humprey Applebys assessment that the only real reason we need Trident is because of the French - if they have nukes we have to have them too, after all they are the country that has repeatedly been aggressive towards us throughout history!

 

... you do realise that you have that completely backwards? The first UK Nuclear test was 1952 and France was 1960 which turns your argument on its head. Oh, incidentally the last time the UK engaged France in battle was 1815 - more than 200 years ago- the main antagonist in recent times has been the leader of the EU known as Germany. Guess who is pushing for an EU army under a single central command executive?

On another point-because the countries I have mentioned barely have the capability to launch a ballistic strike (I accept that Iran does not have Nukes yet) does nothing to detract from future capabilities. As Stevewinn rightly says, N.Korea is building space capabilities at an alarming rate and all it would take is for the self-aggrandising and unstable (did you see what I did there?) Kim Jong-Un to show what a real man he is by dropping a nuke somewhere, anywhere, he wouldn't care.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EBE Hybrid said:

Regarding the nuclear deterrent, as we already have a nuclear force it would seem uneconomic not to maintain our capability, as I'm sure it would be even more expensive to build up a new nuclear force from scratch at some point in the future, provided that Team America  - World Police would allow us to build a nuclear force from scratch if we'd gotten rid of the current one (sarcasm).

Using a nuclear option? if you're responsible for the use of the nuclear option, when would you consider actively using it. If you have been attacked by a foreign regime you might consider it, but your retaliatory strike would kill many thousands of ordinary people who are just trying to get on with their lives and for the most part try not to think of the government. I imagine the great majority of people the world over get up in the morning and concern themselves with earning the money to pay the bills, their governments foreign policy merely something that gets mentioned on breakfast TV as they eat their toast, would you be prepared to kill thousands in order to attack a few?

Seems to me that any potential leader who can unequivocally state that they would have no hesitation in launching a nuclear strike, shouldn't be in a position where they can. 

Somebody attacks this country with a nuke, or our conventional forces have been so decimated that we face imminent invasion, then absolutely...YES!! I would have no compunction whatsoever in using nuclear retaliation. You see... my concern is protecting the innocents of this Nation before worrying about innocents in the aggressor nation. Harsh? without a doubt, but if our leaders do not have the same resolve then we become sitting-ducks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, keithisco said:

ou do realise that you have that completely backwards? The first UK Nuclear test was 1952 and France was 1960 which turns your argument on its head.

I'm suspecting there may be some satire in that post you quoted. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, stevewinn said:

Theresa May as balls the size of space hoppers.

 

OK, I don't see it but I have to give you a like for the mental image. 

1 hour ago, keithisco said:

... you do realise that you have that completely backwards? The first UK Nuclear test was 1952 and France was 1960 which turns your argument on its head. Oh, incidentally the last time the UK engaged France in battle was 1815 - more than 200 years ago- the main antagonist in recent times has been the leader of the EU known as Germany. 

You do know who sir humphrey appleby is don't you? If not, quick google and you'll see why your serious answer is so funny. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, keithisco said:

Somebody attacks this country with a nuke, or our conventional forces have been so decimated that we face imminent invasion, then absolutely...YES!! I would have no compunction whatsoever in using nuclear retaliation. You see... my concern is protecting the innocents of this Nation before worrying about innocents in the aggressor nation. Harsh? without a doubt, but if our leaders do not have the same resolve then we become sitting-ducks.

But don't you see how totally hypothetical this whole ethical dilemma is, and how wildly improbable, that it's difficult to imagine any circumstances that it might happen. Are we expected to imagine that NATO has been dismantled by America's Mad Tyrant, and that America has become so isolationist that it would stand aside and watch while the countries of Europe are one by one nuked by the Russkies (Or North Korea, or Iran, or whoever), and that, like in 1940, eventually Britain would be the only one left standing after the Russkie (or north Iranian, or whoever) hordes have overrun Poland, then Germany, and then France? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, stevewinn said:

The fact the UK's nuclear arsenal form part of NATO's nuclear defence strategy, and the threat posed by potential adversaries should not to be underplayed or underestimated.

Well exactly, and even with mr. Trump's talk (Which, as with nearly everything else, he seems to have abandoned now) about NATO, can you imagine any circumstances where Britain might have to face aggressors alone and consider having to use its nuclear detergent? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

But don't you see how totally hypothetical this whole ethical dilemma is, and how wildly improbable, that it's difficult to imagine any circumstances that it might happen. Are we expected to imagine that NATO has been dismantled by America's Mad Tyrant, and that America has become so isolationist that it would stand aside and watch while the countries of Europe are one by one nuked by the Russkies (Or North Korea, or Iran, or whoever), and that, like in 1940, eventually Britain would be the only one left standing after the Russkie (or north Iranian, or whoever) hordes have overrun Poland, then Germany, and then France? 

I don't mean to have a go at individuals, but it is the most ridiculously irrelevant argument, it's puerile. It's like worrying about asteroid impacts (Lembit Opik) it just isn't going to happen in the next four years, and isn't what we should be worried about right now.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Setton said:

OK, I don't see it but I have to give you a like for the mental image. 

You do know who sir humphrey appleby is don't you? If not, quick google and you'll see why your serious answer is so funny. 

Sometimes...just sometimes I hate UM'ers :rolleyes: - I was well and truly "owned" <<****-skulks to the fridge for a cold-one>>

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, oldrover said:

I don't mean to have a go at individuals, but it is the most ridiculously irrelevant argument, it's puerile. It's like worrying about asteroid impacts (Lembit Opik) it just isn't going to happen in the next four years, and isn't what we should be worried about right now.

Point taken...I am more interested in supporting our businesses and creating a real export drive supported both financially and politically (DTI in foreign embassies have done some great work for UK Companies) as it is from this that the real benefits of Brexit will flow. No more from me on first-use Nuclear strikes <<takes binoculars to garden to look for asteroids>>

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, keithisco said:

 <<takes binoculars to garden to look for asteroids>>

Cool. I'll take over from you at 04:00. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

I could be wrong but I'm getting a whiff of conspiracy connected to this election -
Now, apparently, Labour are said to be around only one point behind the Conservatives -

How has Corbyn et al gone from practically zero to hero in such a short time -?

Getting Labour elected to reverse the EU referendum result or call for another referendum or
to keep us in the single market with open borders -- could be the last ditch attempt to stop Brexit
as it was voted for by the majority - 

I'm getting a picture of Tony Blair with his EU mates working behind the scenes with the Mind Control Media
and the SNP --- to thwart the decision to leave - maybe even planning to try and rig results of certain key areas
in some way..?

If Labour get enough seats to team up with the SNP and cause an upset --- well you get the picture -

bye bye Brexit.... (am I getting paranoid or could it happen...?)

:wacko:

.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bee said:

.

I could be wrong but I'm getting a whiff of conspiracy connected to this election -
Now, apparently, Labour are said to be around only one point behind the Conservatives -

How has Corbyn et al gone from practically zero to hero in such a short time -?

Getting Labour elected to reverse the EU referendum result or call for another referendum or
to keep us in the single market with open borders -- could be the last ditch attempt to stop Brexit
as it was voted for by the majority - 

I'm getting a picture of Tony Blair with his EU mates working behind the scenes with the Mind Control Media
and the SNP --- to thwart the decision to leave - maybe even planning to try and rig results of certain key areas
in some way..?

If Labour get enough seats to team up with the SNP and cause an upset --- well you get the picture -

bye bye Brexit.... (am I getting paranoid or could it happen...?)

:wacko:

Well theyve committed to carrying out brexit and named the team to lead negotiations, which is a vast improvement on the tory team due simply to not having any of the tories in it...whether it will do any good...is another question...

As a result I'd expect any remainers to get behind the Lib dems, Blair himself hates Corbyn so no support there. However the overriding opinion of the UK at the moment appears to be "Lets get on with it!" ; people are prepared to lump it if not actually like it.  I would add that nobody seems to be supporting the lib dems idea of a second referendum, its not exactly winning votes.  So don't worry about that at least.

As for Corbyn-

 He was villified and derided and scorned by the Right wing and their Media supporters as unelectable.  

When nobody had heard of him (he was very well known in his contsituency, but not at all beyond that) that seemed valid as they had nothing else to go on.

Unfortunatly for the Right and their media chums, not everyone is Right wing, or one of their media supporters.

As a result people actually went to listen to him and discovered he's actually a nice bloke. He's prepared to listen to practically anything, will attend any meeting (even if the only other people present are two old ladies and a three legged dog as one book put it) just to meet and listen to people. He Believes in Peace and is prepared to wave pretty much any placard going to get it, believes deep down that everyone is really a nice chap who you can tea and biscuits with, believes that you have to talk to and listen to people you don't like, even despise, to break down societies barriers and improve relations within a society. This draws ire from various quarters....

...BUT! The fact he's been doing this for 30 years and is STILL championing the same causes and is now putting them in manifestos, and that suggests he's not doing it get votes, he's saying those things because he Believes in them!

And that gives him credibility that every other politician currently campaigning lacks- They are liable to say stuff to get votes, to change their minds based on profit , and only saying stuff that they hope will translate into votes, to U-turn at every opportunity and abandon manifestos the moment they are elected (or as with May even before she's been elected!) .

This is a guy thats championed the underdog and the oppressed for decades, even before he was elected, and everyone who feels downtrodden sees that- they like what he says, and like the manifesto, and they are hoping that THIS TIME, maybe JUST THIS ONCE they might be able to vote for a guy who wont turn his back on them once elected.

Theres no mystery here, no conspiracy:

The media campaign against him, with its undisguised Bias from the newspapers especially and even from the BBC highlights his underdog status and the people, fed up with the Tory lies, and U-Turns and Soundbites and Tautological statements which they try and pass off as policies , and cuts all over the place, killing people to make money, all while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and hide their money where the tax man can't get it whilst telling everyone the country is skint, are drawn to Corbyn and a vision of the future where things can be better.

Of course they are drawn to him for that, how can they not be?  They're fed up with the barefaced bull**** from May and see through the fact that her entire campaign was built on the fact that shes not Corbyn! She has nothing else to offer except more misery and more cuts and people WANT change, they NEED it , the country can't go on like this!

I always want to talk to people about their vote and how and, more importantly, WHY they intend to vote the way they do.

Two Hard Brexit loving, lifelong Tory supporters I know are refusing to vote for May . They despise her as a Shallow Nobody spewing soundbites and lining her pockets at the expense of the NHS.

I cant find anyone in the NHS who will vote Tory- Thats the third biggest organisation in the ENTIRE WORLD who despise May and who will not give her a vote.

I went camping the other week with a police officer and according to him every man jack of 'em will vote against the tories.

I socialise with a number of soldiers and ex-servicemen- Not one is willing to give May their vote. They tell me their colleagues and comrades aren't interested in her either.

And this is a two party state, more or less, so Corbyn gets the vote.  Its not that they don't think he supported the IRA (or at least the republican movement) , or talked to Hamas over tea and biscuits, its just that they don't CARE, so the slurs and bias , the rights ONLY weapon against him, are ignored!  How could a Nurse who has seen a real terms decrease in her pay for 8 years on the run, whilst the Rich and huge corporations hide their money offshore ever vote for May who helps them keep their money safe, when she could vote Labour?

And the crowds he draws, in their thousands, crowding around to hear and talk to him, means that people are excited to see him, about voting for him!

When did you last see a young person EXCITED to cast a vote that didn't involve Ant and Dec on ITV?!   But  my office is full of them, and I cannot blame them for that at all.  There are a few Tory supporters, at least traditionally, but they are all wavering in the face of this excitement, and May is not helping.  My office has about 400 people in it. Well over 60%  of them are women aged 18-30- traditionally considered the people least likely to vote, the hardest to motivate to get to cast their vote- and they are loving Corbyn, they love what he says and what he stands for are looking forward to cast their vote.  If this is even slightly representative of the country then Corbyn has a lot of voters behind him.

While he walks amongst the people in the streets she skulks in via the fire exit, only speaking to a select few, evading questions and dodging issues , the doors are locked in case anyone gets in and actually asks a question, But that doesn't work because people have questions and they want answers rather than soundbites, the issues of healthcare and education affect them EVERY DAY and need dealing with, not avoiding.  No wonder they laugh at her when she talks. They don't laugh at him because they know he's listening to them!

When even the BBC has to tell people to go easy on the Tories you know something has gone terribly wrong for May.

I'm not saying Corbyn is perfect. I have my doubts over some issues, but right now they don't matter much-  The Tories have spent 7 years destroying this country- they could have undone the damage done by Blair the b****** but they chose to make their mates richer and ruined the country in process, and now they want to destroy it more, bit by bit selling everything of value and use and killing people to enable them to destroy it more.

Corbyn, might, just might, be the man to fix it. I don't know if he can, even if he gets in the vested interests are still powerful and will still be against him, but I can't see anyone else who will even bother to try.

So don't be surprised at all by the increase in his support. He's a people person and hes getting out there and meeting people from all walks of life and that is where and why he can win this.

If the Right  wants to win (and it has been questioned that May doesnt seem to want to win) then they have to stop attacking the man, and make his ideas and policies their target, and come out with better ones.  Alas that will mean more U-turns and we all know how May loves to u-turn! 

 

Edited by Torchwood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bee said:

I could be wrong but I'm getting a whiff of conspiracy connected to this election -
Now, apparently, Labour are said to be around only one point behind the Conservatives -

How has Corbyn et al gone from practically zero to hero in such a short time -?

Getting Labour elected to reverse the EU referendum result or call for another referendum or
to keep us in the single market with open borders -- could be the last ditch attempt to stop Brexit
as it was voted for by the majority - 

I'm getting a picture of Tony Blair with his EU mates working behind the scenes with the Mind Control Media
and the SNP --- to thwart the decision to leave - maybe even planning to try and rig results of certain key areas
in some way..?

If Labour get enough seats to team up with the SNP and cause an upset --- well you get the picture -

bye bye Brexit.... (am I getting paranoid or could it happen...?)

:wacko:

I think its quite obvious Corbyn has no chance in this election. While he does have some devout followers it is no where near enough. And everyone else is totally against him. 

Just him being against Trident alone is enough for me to never ever entertain voting for him. His economic policies would take Britain back to the 70s where people did job sharing, industry was crippled by strikes, and homes had inconsistent electricity supplies. But the fresh batch of youth who are his main core of support are oblivious as to what happened last time someone like Corbyn was in power. They have been fed a solely positive interpretation of socialism.

Edited by RabidMongoose
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

Just him being against Trident alone is enough for me to never ever entertain voting for him.

Why's that then? can you envisage a situation here Britain would stand alone and only its Nuclear weapons could save civilization? Brexit is one thing, but some of these arguments or fears seem to hark back with a sort of wistful nostalgia to the glory days of 1940.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he was to say "yes, I'm against Trident, but the money that's currently devoted to that I'm going to redistribute among those parts of the armed forces that might be valuable in realistically plausible situations, and also on the police and intelligence services in their fight against a real and present danger, fundamentalist jihadist terrorism", then he'd have my cross in the box of their local candidate, even if I haven't seen hide or hair of the candidate they're supposedly putting forward here. In fact, I wonder how much of the money that's gone towards the nuclear "detergent" has been responsible for the shocking neglect of the navy and so many other parts of the services, and which may have been to blame in part for unnecessary casualties sustained in the various adventures in the last decade and a half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

His economic policies would take Britain back to the 70s where people did job sharing

Two people doing the job of one but both being paid the usual full-time rate as before for it, which was how the unions wangled it in the 70s? That'd be sure to be a vote winner! :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

last time someone like Corbyn was in power.

the Labour PM who was in charge at that time was Jim Callaghan, who was as far away from Corbyn as you could get. Corbyn's perhaps more like Michael Foot, now there's someone to emulate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

Two people doing the job of one but both being paid the usual full-time rate as before for it, which was how the unions wangled it in the 70s? That'd be sure to be a vote winner! :D 

Businesses do not benefit from what effectively amounts to a £20 per hour minimum wage. Or the successful tax payer doesnt benefit if the wage is made up to the same amount by redistributing their wealth away.

Money doesnt grow on trees. Too much socialism cripples the state.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RabidMongoose said:

Businesses do not benefit from what effectively amounts to a £20 per hour minimum wage. Or the successful tax payer doesnt benefit if the wage is made up to the same amount by redistributing their wealth away.

Money doesnt grow on trees. Too much socialism cripples the state.

Yeah when you factor in pensions etc that could get out of hand fast....but too many people not able to feed themselves because they're on a zero hours contract and havn't worked for two months destroys a country just as well.

Once there were running jokes about benefits claimants being able to afford wide screen tellys, and all the games consoles they could eat- now we have people on proper jobs like police officers and nurses being forced to go to foodbanks (and when the hell did they become a thing!). Both those ends of the spectrum are ridiculous places for a functioning and leading economy to find itself.

Your not wrong that too much socialism cripples the state, but so does not enough; we have to get the balance right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Torchwood said:

Yeah when you factor in pensions etc that could get out of hand fast....but too many people not able to feed themselves because they're on a zero hours contract and havn't worked for two months destroys a country just as well.

Once there were running jokes about benefits claimants being able to afford wide screen tellys, and all the games consoles they could eat- now we have people on proper jobs like police officers and nurses being forced to go to foodbanks (and when the hell did they become a thing!). Both those ends of the spectrum are ridiculous places for a functioning and leading economy to find itself.

Your not wrong that too much socialism cripples the state, but so does not enough; we have to get the balance right.

The starting wage for a police officer is £23,000 so if they are having to go to a food bank then the problem is with them. With benefits no one goes hungry (zero hour contract or no work) unless they choose to let themselves fall through the safety net. All they have to do is apply for jobs to get unemployment benefits which, while they cannot afford games consoles with, is certainly enough for them to feed and cloth themselves.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2017 at 1:57 PM, bee said:

.

I could be wrong but I'm getting a whiff of conspiracy connected to this election -
Now, apparently, Labour are said to be around only one point behind the Conservatives -

How has Corbyn et al gone from practically zero to hero in such a short time -?

Getting Labour elected to reverse the EU referendum result or call for another referendum or
to keep us in the single market with open borders -- could be the last ditch attempt to stop Brexit
as it was voted for by the majority - 

I'm getting a picture of Tony Blair with his EU mates working behind the scenes with the Mind Control Media
and the SNP --- to thwart the decision to leave - maybe even planning to try and rig results of certain key areas
in some way..?

If Labour get enough seats to team up with the SNP and cause an upset --- well you get the picture -

bye bye Brexit.... (am I getting paranoid or could it happen...?)

:wacko:

.

 

 

Bee, The company's who carry out the polls have no credibility left after the shambolic performance in recent years, 2015 election, Brexit and Trump. So they've changed how they target the pollsters, they are targeting the minority seats, the contested seats with low majorities and analysing from that, hoping that will allow them to regain some credibility, YouGov for example in their latest poll, the poll as the Tories losing 100 seats and also gaining a hundred, they also have Labour gaining and losing 80 seats how contradictory is that, and a hell of a error margin they also expect their computer model to predict the wrong outcome in 30 to 40 seats/constituencies.

The only accurate poll is the one being held on June 8th.

Remember this, the worst of the Tory cuts came in 2012 and the Tories went on to win the election in 2015 against all predictions. The Tory Government will win, question is how big of a majority. 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎04‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 1:57 PM, bee said:

.

I could be wrong but I'm getting a whiff of conspiracy connected to this election -
Now, apparently, Labour are said to be around only one point behind the Conservatives -

How has Corbyn et al gone from practically zero to hero in such a short time -?

Getting Labour elected to reverse the EU referendum result or call for another referendum or
to keep us in the single market with open borders -- could be the last ditch attempt to stop Brexit
as it was voted for by the majority - 

I'm getting a picture of Tony Blair with his EU mates working behind the scenes with the Mind Control Media
and the SNP --- to thwart the decision to leave - maybe even planning to try and rig results of certain key areas
in some way..?

If Labour get enough seats to team up with the SNP and cause an upset --- well you get the picture -

bye bye Brexit.... (am I getting paranoid or could it happen...?)

:wacko:

 

What planet are you on? The MSM has been as consistently anti-corbyn as they could. The reason Labour is going up in the polls and Tories are not is because they've actually been out campaigning while May and her party just expect people to be good and not upset the status quo. I expect the Tories will still win but hopefully not with the kind of majority that was originally predicted.

As for Labour on Brexit, you do realise they're not going for another referendum or reversing the result? Lib dems are the ones promising another referendum. Do at least try to keep them straight. Otherwise you end up looking ignorant at best and deceitful at worst.

The only conspiracy I can see in the way this election has gone is that the Tories are convinced Brexit can't be a success and are actively trying to throw the election so Labour are left to take the blame.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.