news & politics:discussion

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

Not sure about comparing to Blair and Iraq. There was world wide sympathy for Israel after those grotesque attacks by Hamas, but now the resulting disaster in Gaza is becoming the focus and countries will distance themselves from Israel action and call for restraint. It doesn't change the original revulsion.

Blair/Iraq was different. He took us into an invasion risking british lives and with suspect reason.

in terms of defining a leadership with war crimes , fortunate for Starmer hes not PM at the moment 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Crazyfool01 said:

in terms of defining a leadership with war crimes , fortunate for Starmer hes not PM at the moment 

how could he be guilty of war crimes either way?

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, steviewevie said:

how could he be guilty of war crimes either way?

Starmer ? currently ? how if he just tries for peace ? 

[steviewevie]

I guess you mean in supporting Israel. He has already said as long as within international law...which probably covers him...even though that law has been probably broken multiple times...

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Crazyfool01 said:

Starmer ? currently ? how if he just tries for peace ? 

How make peace with Hamas who's default position is the destruction of Israel?

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I guess you mean in supporting Israel. He has already said as long as within international law...which probably covers him...even though that law has been probably broken multiple times...

had ... past tense , and he would absolutely have known that 

[steviewevie]

5 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

had ... past tense , and he would absolutely have known that 

No, has...he said it the other day...you want real time updates if he thinks their response should be within international law?

In the end it will be up to UN to determine whether war crimes have been committed.

[cellar]

16 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

No, has...he said it the other day...you want real time updates if he thinks their response should be within international law?

In the end it will be up to UN to determine whether war crimes have been committed.

The UN has determined that war crimes have been committed. Forced displacement.

[steviewevie]

 

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

and ignore what Hamas did?

There does seem to be a bit of this, yes Israel have responded in an awful way but some seem very unwilling to comment on what Hamas have done to start it.

Also I find it weird that people are bringing the LOTO into this given everything that’s happened. The leader of the Labour Party has been commented more here than the actual UK PM, which is mental. 

[steviewevie]

Here he is the evil zionist...

 

[Crazyfool01]

35 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

There does seem to be a bit of this, yes Israel have responded in an awful way but some seem very unwilling to comment on what Hamas have done to start it.

Also I find it weird that people are bringing the LOTO into this given everything that’s happened. The leader of the Labour Party has been commented more here than the actual UK PM, which is mental. 

have you missed my posts condemning Hamas ? and cellars ? and stevies ? and my post saying starmer has said the same as Sunak who will ultimately be culpable ? 

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Crazyfool01 said:

we put so much on one side being right when actually we need to criticise both sides , its interesting to see the stances now starting to be rolled back . Starmer is fortunate at this point hes not PM and it's Sunak that is being pressed from within his own party about the war crimes . If he were PM this could easily be his Blair Iraq moment which for me Blair was lucky to escape . These days of social media is all there in black and white 

The thing is we can say what we want and (admittedly making assumptions on your behalf ther definitely don’t on mine ) nobody gives a sh*t. Starmer lives in a world where what he says matters and sometimes he probably can’t say what he wants.

Starmer wants to be PM of this country. In a way I admire him for that as it’s a job I wouldn’t want to do. It’s a job where you make tough decisions and get involved in this crazy geopolitical world where i wouldn’t know where to start. I don’t have a clue how to sort this mess, but in his position you can’t say I don’t have a clue and have to think not just about what you say, the short and long term impact and how it will be interpreted or twisted.

I think your point about social media is an apt one. Starmer could come out with statements some on the left would like, could get likes and retweets. Instead he is playing the long game and taking the flack that comes with that. This shitstorm won’t be solved by statements on social media, i think Starmer gets that and is laser focused on winning the election and making things better

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

have you missed my posts condemning Hamas ? and cellars ? and stevies ? and my post saying starmer has said the same as Sunak who will ultimately be culpable ? 

I wasn’t commenting on Stevie.

There’s been many more comments on the LOTO than the PM for some reason. Imagine back in 1939 if when Germany went into the Sudetenland people were more bothered about Clement Atlee’s response than Chamberlain’s.

[Crazyfool01]

4 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I wasn’t commenting on Stevie.

There’s been many more comments on the LOTO than the PM for some reason. Imagine back in 1939 if when Germany went into the Sudetenland people were more bothered about Clement Atlee’s response than Chamberlain’s.

because actually I expect better from Starmer , hes a lawyer so id hope he were more careful on human rights , Sunak is a prick and nothing surprises me where hes concerned . 

[steviewevie]

6 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

because actually I expect better from Starmer , hes a lawyer so id hope he were more careful on human rights , Sunak is a prick and nothing surprises me where hes concerned . 

Are you ok with Starmer's latest statement, or still not good enough?

[pink_triangle]

19 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

because actually I expect better from Starmer , hes a lawyer so id hope he were more careful on human rights , Sunak is a prick and nothing surprises me where hes concerned . 

Do you really think Biden, Macron , Sunak etc are all going to be hauled to international court and thrown in jail? International law is by its nature still political. Hopefully this sh*t storm will be sorted through politics as it won’t through the law. 

My guess is Starmer/labour will pretty much follow the Sunak (and mainstream western leader) message. Politics is sometime about knowing which battles to fight and which you can win 

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

because actually I expect better from Starmer , hes a lawyer so id hope he were more careful on human rights , Sunak is a prick and nothing surprises me where hes concerned . 

I’m sorry but I don’t think that anything Starmer says would be good enough in your latest guise.

It is strange that your focus is more on Labours response than the governments and as I said if this was in 1939 it would be so odd. 

[cellar]

23 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Do you really think Biden, Macron , Sunak etc are all going to be hauled to international court and thrown in jail?

Did he say this? Think he's just pointing out that it's a bit sh*t that people who should know better are supporting war crimes.

Honestly it's mad how much people are defending Israel on here.

[fraybentos1]

26 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

in your latest guise.

you're such a passive aggressive c**t ozanne

 

27 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

focus is more on Labours response than the governments

you've literally posted every post on twitter about labour in this thread for the last 3 years you cretin. boo hoo they're getting some scrutiny. 

[Crazyfool01]

26 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I’m sorry but I don’t think that anything Starmer says would be good enough in your latest guise.

It is strange that your focus is more on Labours response than the governments and as I said if this was in 1939 it would be so odd. 

My latest guise ? That makes no sense 

[pink_triangle]

27 minutes ago, cellar said:

Did he say this? Think he's just pointing out that it's a bit sh*t that people who should know better are supporting war crimes.

Honestly it's mad how much people are defending Israel on here.

Who is supporting Israel? I wish neither side bombed each other. I’m supporting Starmer who I believe is taking the correct approach. If people want Starmer to scream about war crimes and solidarity with Palestinians fine, but it won’t save a single life, it will split the party and if Labour wins give them no negotiation power.

[cellar]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Who is supporting Israel? I wish neither side bombed each other. I’m supporting Starmer who I believe is taking the correct approach. If people want Starmer to scream about war crimes and solidarity with Palestinians fine, but it won’t save a single life, it will split the party and if Labour wins give them no negotiation power.

So, you're supporting Starmer, who supports Israel...

Do you think Israel has committed war crimes? Do you think there is an apartheid state? Do you think the West is complicit in the situation?

Or is all of this irrelevant and superceded by blind support for a party that should win the next GE with their eyes closed anyway?

[fraybentos1]

13 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

My latest guise ? That makes no sense 

he's just being mean cause he is upset you aren't blindly praising starmer for every single thing he does

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

My latest guise ? That makes no sense 

In your current politics stance.