Jump to content

The Politics Thread 2019


David

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 12.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
36 minutes ago, Needlesh said:

When one considers the question in terms of 1500 years of struggle for power in Ireland, and the bloodshed on both sides, no-one was right. 

When viewed in the narrower context of reaction to, for instance the Manchester pub bombings, or Enniskillen, or Brighton Grand Hotel, there is a right side and a wrong side of history. Corbyn was the wrong side of the line.

Aaaah, but what about Bloody Sunday, or the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, I hear you cry...well the one doesn't set the other right.

When things are shitty and people are being killed and dispossesed, a person should pick a side and own it warts and all. WW2 was right and proper to fight...but Dresden though? The rape of Berlin? You want to wring hands or end naziism?

Corbyn's an idealist, unfortunately, idealists tend to get nothing done, and people killed while they do it. People are not ideal, are stupid, selfish and irrational in fact, and do not confirm to theory.

I'm never heard 1500 years mentioned before in relation to British rule in Ireland,. 12th century is the generally accepted starting point of that regrettable venture.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but there does seem to be a hint of forgiving imperialism about your post.  There is no difficultly in identifying who is in the wrong when one country invades and subjugates another.  It's as clear as day.  It's not simply a case of 'bloodshed of both sides and no-one was right'.

But I'm talking centuries ago there, dark and distant past.  None of that justifies the IRA violence of the 'Troubles'.  Directed against a civilian unionist population that was by then entirely native to that area and indeed an army to had been sent to keep the peace (although it did slip from this justifiable motive from time to time).  There was no excuse for the IRAs barbarous and evil acts.  So for me Corbyn does have questions to answer as to why he was outside that court in 1986  when IRA suspects were being tried.

He clearly seemed to support the notion of a united Ireland. A perfectly legitimate stance if pursued by peaceful means.  But that doesn't explain why he'd stand in solidarity with IRA prisoners.  Maybe it was the actions of the justice system he was concerned about. Let's be honest at that time there were plenty of people in British jails serving time for IRA crimes who were subsequently found entirely innocent. The Justice system wasn't functioning as it should.  I don't know his motives, but it would be know harm if he took the time to explain them clearly.  It's hardly a surprise that people would find his actions at the time problematic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Of course not. I just know he wont be because he is an absolute buffoon. If he is successful then great, it wont be the absolute car crash the nation is bracing itself for.

It's unfortunate that he won't be able to get much done until he calls a general election, because people are trying to prevent him from doing anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Do you think he will be? 

Once he has a good majority. It's as if people have been ignoring the things he says he wants to do. Stuff most people want, but as soon as he says that's what he will do, it's either bad or he won't deliver. What a predicament ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Do you think he will be? 

He’ll be no worse than the last clown and also a dam sight better than Corbyn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

I'm never heard 1500 years mentioned before in relation to British rule in Ireland,. 12th century is the generally accepted starting point of that regrettable venture.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but there does seem to be a hint of forgiving imperialism about your post.  There is no difficultly in identifying who is in the wrong when one country invades and subjugates another.  It's as clear as day.  It's not simply a case of 'bloodshed of both sides and no-one was right'.

But I'm talking centuries ago there, dark and distant past.  None of that justifies the IRA violence of the 'Troubles'.  Directed against a civilian unionist population that was by then entirely native to that area and indeed an army to had been sent to keep the peace (although it did slip from this justifiable motive from time to time).  There was no excuse for the IRAs barbarous and evil acts.  So for me Corbyn does have questions to answer as to why he was outside that court in 1986  when IRA suspects were being tried.

He clearly seemed to support the notion of a united Ireland. A perfectly legitimate stance if pursued by peaceful means.  But that doesn't explain why he'd stand in solidarity with IRA prisoners.  Maybe it was the actions of the justice system he was concerned about. Let's be honest at that time there were plenty of people in British jails serving time for IRA crimes who were subsequently found entirely innocent. The Justice system wasn't functioning as it should.  I don't know his motives, but it would be know harm if he took the time to explain them clearly.  It's hardly a surprise that people would find his actions at the time problematic. 

A fair post chap. The 1500 years I mention reflects the whole tumultuous history of Ireland, a badland on the edge of Europe for centuries before the Vikings, before Britain was even considered as a potential unified whole.

One thing I'll stand on though...I absolutely forgive all imperialism up to WW2 from any and all parties. Thereafter it became apparent that the world has moved on. You can't judge yesterday by today's standards. What do we do today which we accept but will be abhorrent in 100 years? Single use plastic, certainly. Fossil fuels? Religion? Abortion, maybe? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 1967Ram said:

I hope we find out, but it's fine to have differing views.

USA has one buffoon, now we have another!

Depends what you define a buffoon, for me a terrorist sympathiser is certainly one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Needlesh said:

Given the hand she was dealt, I think Theresa May did as well as anyone could expect.

Ok

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...