Mostly things I believe too. Especially anti-austerity, immigration (I see we're now finally calling them what they are : refugees - about time too !), and a maximum wage.
Things I don't agree with : cancelling Trident (a very good idea in principle, but not right now - or if it is scrapped, use the money on conventional forces instead), uniting Ireland, and possibly leaving NATO.
I support his idea of talking to militant groups in the Middle East, but :
"Asked during a Sky News hustings whether there were any circumstances in which he would deploy UK military forces, Corbyn said: "I'm sure there are some but I can't think of them at the moment.""
IS are burning people alive. Ruling out military intervention seems like a bad idea at this stage.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34209478
Sister blog of Physicists of the Caribbean in which I babble about non-astronomy stuff, because everyone needs a hobby
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Whose cloud is it anyway ?
I really don't understand the most militant climate activists who are also opposed to geoengineering . Or rather, I think I understand t...
-
"To claim that you are being discriminated against because you have lost your right to discriminate against others shows a gross lack o...
-
For all that I know the Universe is under no obligation to make intuitive sense, I still don't like quantum mechanics. Just because some...
-
Hmmm. [The comments below include a prime example of someone claiming they're interested in truth but just want higher standard, where...
Rhys, please try to think of a scenario in which we could make a situation better by launching nuclear weapons on however many targets we can. This exercise should convince you the things have no sane use at all.
ReplyDeleteChris Blackmore please think of all the money that'll be pumped back into the economy from defence projects. All the engineers, scientists, welders, crew involved in the project. Please also think about the situation we'd be in with no retaliative deterrent. Having nuclear weapons is not the same as using them.
ReplyDeleteLaunching them ?!?! God forbid ! No sane person would ever do such a thing. That's not what they're for.
ReplyDeleteThe way I see it there are still insane people in the world. The nuclear deterrent is useless as a deterrent against conventional warfare, however it is a deterrent against (ironically) nuclear warfare. Even the most batshit crazy dictator would think twice against a nuclear first strike knowing that they would themselves be annihilated.
Don't get me wrong - I want nuclear weapons gone. I just think that now is not the time.
Also :
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX_d_vMKswE
I've spent the last sixty fucking years terrified of the world ending in a nuclear holocaust, and I am ready to fight, one on one, armed with seriously whippy sticks, against any cunt who says we need them to protect ourselves, because that idea goes beyond stupid, and a long way into suicidal because cretinous.
ReplyDelete"...I am ready to fight, one on one, armed with seriously whippy sticks..."
ReplyDeleteYou're going to be defeated, hard, by the other guy with a bigger stick. Twat.
Whippy sticks are all well and good, but how about rational arguments ? The fact that there hasn't been a nuclear holocaust in the last sixty years strongly suggests that maintaining a nuclear deterrent is not a suicidal option. Now imagine if the Western world had given up nukes and Russia hadn't...
ReplyDeleteWhile I would normally argue that if you want peace you must prepare for peace, if you want to get rid of a weapon as dangerous as nukes, I think it's a case of everyone or no-one. One side disarming doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Oliver Hamilton I was reading your comment, thinking about it as I went along. Then you ended it with a direct insult. Blocked.
ReplyDelete