UK Politics IV: Disraeli Gears

[Duchy of Sark]

Personally, in this whole Falklands thing, I'd be much more concerned about the fact we won't have any ships, or that they might not work.

Argentina will win again, like in 1982.

[Elepis]

Personally, in this whole Falklands thing, I'd be much more concerned about the fact we won't have any ships, or that they might not work.

so basically we have live fire target practice for the Argentine navy?

[Elepis]

Personally, in this whole Falklands thing, I'd be much more concerned about the fact we won't have any ships, or that they might not work.

Argentina will win again, like in 1982.

by what measure did they win in 1982?

[Frank Zipper]

How many times does Arch have to point out this is not a Falklands thread?

[Krumbia]

How many times does Arch have to point out this is not a Falklands thread?

My post was more making the point that it appears we cannot run our Royal Navy ships for shit.

[Lamadia III]

How many times does Arch have to point out this is not a Falklands thread?

The Falklands War is a big part of UK foreign policy, and thus involves UK politics.

[Vassenor]

How many times does Arch have to point out this is not a Falklands thread?

The Falklands War is a big part of UK foreign policy, and thus involves UK politics.

Yes, but a member of the mod staff has openly stated it does not belong here.

[The Nihilistic view]

I see it as we have nuclear weapons, Argentina does not; if they really want to dislocate our relations, if they really want to harm British territory & citizens, then they need to accept that we will never rule out using our arsenal in order to defend our people.
It is very simple.

Are you MAD!

[The Nihilistic view]

Anyway we have. They are for a second strike, so unless the Argies nuke us we won't be using them.

[Wolfmanne2]

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2016/07/27/sp ... more-21006

Oh dear.

[Elepis]

Saw a thing on the news that said "Alan Bennett admits to murdering two Redcar women" and I just thought "What the fucking fuck? Alan Bennet? The Gay playwrite?"

But apparently it is a different Alan Bennett Although that would have been funny

[Lamadia III]

Saw a thing on the news that said "Alan Bennett admits to murdering two Redcar women" and I just thought "What the fucking fuck? Alan Bennet?"

But apparently it is a different Alan Bennett Although that would have been funny

Wasn't Mo Molen the former MP for Redcar?

[Souseiseki]

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2016/07/27/speaker-poised-to-strip-labour-of-designation-as-her-majestys-opposition-in-autumn/#more-21006

Oh dear.

this is a disaster. clearly this means the PLP must be reigned in and start performing their jobs immediately.

[Wolfmanne2]

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2016/07/27/speaker-poised-to-strip-labour-of-designation-as-her-majestys-opposition-in-autumn/#more-21006

Oh dear.

this is a disaster. clearly this means the PLP must be reigned in and start performing their jobs immediately.

If someone doesn't like their employer, why do they have an obligation to work for them? Especially when said employer refuses to bargain or compromise with them.

[Elepis]

this is a disaster. clearly this means the PLP must be reigned in and start performing their jobs immediately.

If someone doesn't like their employer, why do they have an obligation to work for them? Especially when said employer refuses to bargain or compromise with them.

Their employer being the Labour electorate & members?

[Wolfmanne2]

If someone doesn't like their employer, why do they have an obligation to work for them? Especially when said employer refuses to bargain or compromise with them.

Their employer being the Labour electorate & members?

The Leader of the Opposition in this context. The selectorate have no influence over the Parliamentary Labour Party as MPs get their mandates from constituents, it is the Leader of the Opposition's responsibility.

[Arkolon]

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2016/07/27/speaker-poised-to-strip-labour-of-designation-as-her-majestys-opposition-in-autumn/#more-21006

Oh dear.

Seems a bit too speculative, I don't know if I buy this, especially with that information 'update'.

[Chestaan]

this is a disaster. clearly this means the PLP must be reigned in and start performing their jobs immediately.

If someone doesn't like their employer, why do they have an obligation to work for them? Especially when said employer refuses to bargain or compromise with them.

If someone doesn't like their employer then they should resign from their job. Maybe the PLP members who oppose Corbyn should step down as MPs. Anyway, why not accept the democratic mandate of Corbyn? For the sake of the party if for nothing else.

[The Nihilistic view]

this is a disaster. clearly this means the PLP must be reigned in and start performing their jobs immediately.

If someone doesn't like their employer, why do they have an obligation to work for them? Especially when said employer refuses to bargain or compromise with them.

Their employer is the people of the United Kingdom, if they are not willing to do the job of the opposition then they should not be the opposition or even perhaps MPs.

[Wolfmanne2]

If someone doesn't like their employer, why do they have an obligation to work for them? Especially when said employer refuses to bargain or compromise with them.

If someone doesn't like their employer then they should resign from their job. Maybe the PLP members who oppose Corbyn should step down as MPs. Anyway, why not accept the democratic mandate of Corbyn? For the sake of the party if for nothing else.

A backbench MP is not a servant of their party leader, they are a servant of their constituency. That's the principle of parliamentary democracy. Their CLP selected them and if the constituents rejected the CLP's choice they would have voted for someone else.

The idea of a party leader having a mandate has been taken too far under Corbyn's leadership. They have a democratic mandate to implement their vision, but that doesn't stop the PLP or individual MPs from raising concerns on behalf of their constituents. They also have to campaign on that mandate and I would not want to campaign under one that I think could lose me or my colleagues' seats (thus lessening the chance of a Labour government). Why should the PLP respect Corbyn's mandate if they refuse to respect his MP's mandates?

Quick reminder that Jeremy Corbyn called for or supported multiple 'coups' whilst Kinnock, Smith and Blair were Leaders; I guess he technically had a mandate to do this as his constituents had elected him to parliament thus endorsing his ideology of being a left-wing nitpick. But if we go under the principle of 'one mandate to rule them on', than Corbyn has violated that multiple times, including the time when Kinnock did secure the largest democratic mandate (Kinnock's 88.6% to Benn's 11.4%).

Politics is not about subservience, it is about compromise. Corbyn easily could have avoided the resignation of multiple MPs had he been more willing to compromise or had he been more competent. Lisa Nandy, Lucy Powell and even Owen Smith would still be in the cabinet. He's paying for his mistakes and if he wins, he has to reunify the party. Personally I think the best way he could do that is by reintroducing Shadow Cabinet elections and also by taking a Clement Atlee-style 'first among equals' role, but sadly Seamas Milne and John McDonnell are advising him, not me.

[Wolfmanne2]

If someone doesn't like their employer, why do they have an obligation to work for them? Especially when said employer refuses to bargain or compromise with them.

Their employer is the people of the United Kingdom, if they are not willing to do the job of the opposition then they should not be the opposition or even perhaps MPs.

They are doing their jobs on behalf of their constituents, who are Labour voters that want a Labour government and they believe that Jeremy Corbyn is unable to bring us closer to that goal of forming a Labour government.

[Elepis]

Their employer is the people of the United Kingdom, if they are not willing to do the job of the opposition then they should not be the opposition or even perhaps MPs.

They are doing their jobs on behalf of their constituents, who are Labour voters that want a Labour government and they believe that Jeremy Corbyn is unable to bring us closer to that goal of forming a Labour government.

but apparently the voters do

[Lamadia III]

I hope Theresa May begins to pursue a harder line against ISIL. I would like to see Britain extending its operations in Syria & Iraq to take out military, economic & civil targets, and also to work towards an international policy of blocking ISIL fighters form leaving & entering the Caphilate by tightening controls of the Turkish border.

[Kelinfort]

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2016/07/27/speaker-poised-to-strip-labour-of-designation-as-her-majestys-opposition-in-autumn/#more-21006

Oh dear.

Rip Labour.

20 more years in the wilderness I guess.

[Wolfmanne2]

They are doing their jobs on behalf of their constituents, who are Labour voters that want a Labour government and they believe that Jeremy Corbyn is unable to bring us closer to that goal of forming a Labour government.

but apparently the voters do

No, they don't. Labour voters think that Theresa May would make a better PM than Corbyn and they want Corbyn to step down (can't find the Saving Labour poll to support that, but the moment I do, I'll post it).

I hope Theresa May begins to pursue a harder line against ISIL. I would like to see Britain extending its operations in Syria & Iraq to take out military, economic & civil targets, and also to work towards an international policy of blocking ISIL fighters form leaving & entering the Caphilate by tightening controls of the Turkish border.

You know, it's very easy to call for ground troops to be deployed when you have no personal experience of war yourself. Such a decision is not to be taken lightly and I do not think I could support deploying ground troops in the region as I think a campaign in the region would be long and bloody, though we would win. So would you support he deployment of British forces in the region.