Jeremy Corbyn: In bed with terrorists

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aaronvan, Oct 11, 2015.

  1. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #2
    Get used to people abandoning mainstream political parties that benefit only the rich. Our current crop of politicians are either too stupid or too corrupt to see the danger coming. If you think things are bad now, what until the global economy tanks again and there's nothing left for governments to do to prevent it. The fringe parties will become more and more dangerous, rather like the 1930's.

    That aside, Labour only looks fringe because some view right-wing economics has been superficially successful over the past three decades. Yet now that all the anti-government austerity-worship has worked its way through the system so that it has manifestly harming average people (instead of just the abjectly poor), the right might soon be seeing itself losing popularity. Certainly that will be the case if the economy does tank and there is no safety net in the US and similar countries like the UK.
     
  2. Robstevo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2014
    #4
    And david cameron was a top member of the federation of conservative students who gave out "Hang Mendela" posters and supported the apartheid Government. ....
     
  3. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    People do stupid things sometimes. I presume both Cameron and Corbyn have grown up.
     
  4. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #6
    That's a big assumption WRT a politician ;)
     
  5. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #7
    You've posted an article from the Torygraph berating the leader of the Labour party so you can feign outrage...... Do you want a slow clap now? Or shall I save it for next time you make a pointless thread?
     
  6. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #8
    I doubt it. More likely, powerless fringe parties will throw temper tantrums and elect fringe leaders to annoy the establishment.

    Thatcher? Hell, the United Nations recognized Pol Pot's government as the legitimate Cambodian government. However, I don't believe Maggie attended any funerals of fallen Khmer Rouge soldiers.
     
  7. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    And in the 1930s the UN would have had to recognise the Third Reich as the legitimate German government - however Thatcher didn't have to support Pol Pot - who was as bad as Hitler - and she could have supported the Vietnamese fighting him instead.
     
  8. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #10
    So your complaint is that Thatcher supported the United Nations. Fair enough.

    Any opinion on Jeremy Corbin honoring terrorists who blow-up women and children?
     
  9. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #11
    No, my complaint is that Thatcher actively supported Pol Pot as he was fighting the Vietnamese. And Vietnam = bad at that time.
     
  10. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #13
    I think his point is that terrorism is subjective, when country leaders in the UK have got into bed with such vile people as pol pot, and Pinochet, have called for the execution of civil rights leaders......

    Lets not forget other party leaders have sung praise about Putin, so these stories about Corbyn's proximity to the IRA are desperate mud slinging by a scared right....

    I guess you're probably going to wheel out the line about Corbyn calling Bin Ladens death "a tragedy" next?
     
  11. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #14
    Shedding tears for UBL means he doesn't realize that Al Qaeda is an implacable foe of his Hezbollah buddies. Of course, Holocaust deniers aren't known for their smarts. He should return to university and get a degree in something, anything.
     
  12. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
  13. shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #16
    How exactly could we have put Osama bin Laden on trial? Talk about armed and dangerous. The guy would never have been taken alive.
     
  14. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #17
    That Corbyn feels the U.S. Navy SEALs should have conducted a law enforcement mission instead of a military raid--complaining we didn't put UBL on trial--shows his naiveté. Like a good 9/11 Truther, he goes off the deep end suggesting that perhaps UBL wasn't really killed and the whole thing was a false-flag operation. Interesting that he presented his case on Iranian television. Why not in Parliament?
     
  15. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #18
    He didn't shed a tear for Osama Bin Laden.

    You genuinely don't even know what you're talking about do you?
     
  16. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #19
    Have you got a source that shows he stated OBL was not killed?
     
  17. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #20
    His point was there was no intention or attempt to take him alive, it was a execute on sight command. That undermines the very idea of democracy the west is claiming to protect.
     
  18. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #21
    Not that armed and dangerous, they shot him at point blank whilst he was unarmed ;)
     
  19. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #22
    Corbyn doesn't know the definition of a military raid. Al Qaeda declared war on the United States and we conducted a military operation fully in compliance with the Law of Land Warfare. That undermines democracy how?

    And the SEALs should have done what? Set down their rifles and frisked him for a suicide vest? :rolleyes:

    I said he suggested UBL wasn't killed:

    Face it. He's a crackpot.
     
  20. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #23
    Regardless of how heinous a crime, a trial is hinge point of what it means to have a democracy.


    Yes. It was pretty obvious he wouldn't have been wearing a suicide vest, and frankly SEALs (and the army) sign up to be put in dangerous situations.

    Have you got a source to show that he suggested it? Please clarify where you've got your evidence from.

    Ironic.
     
  21. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #24
    but then Pol Pot wasn't killing UK citizens inside the UK, unlike the IRA, so your example doesn't really offer an equivalency.

    How likely are UK swing voters to turn to a candidate that's supposedly supported the killing of UK citizens and soldiers?
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #25
    Neither did Hitler until the war started. So before that was it OK to support him?

    Look the IRA were hardly a good organisation. But they weren't as bad as Pol Pot. They didn't kill 1/4 of the population of any country.
     

Share This Page