Is Corbyn Nuts not to bomb Syria?

wanderlust wrote:

rammywhite wrote:

wanderlust wrote:I suspect BA Systems are down on their quarterly figures so they are demanding their puppets dance to get business moving again. The last thing the Tories need ATM is unhappy shareholders.

BAe makes no money in the UK anyway- all its profits are derived from its US operations

Oh! - they get all their money from headquarters?

No- its a factual statement. Go and read their  Accounts paying close attention to the segmental analysis

very true Boncey, the real power behind ISIS are the Saudi's yet because of the oil and the money they can carry on as they please

Great cartoon bonce! Did you draw it yourself?

xmiles wrote:Great cartoon bonce! Did you draw it yourself?

Ha,not me.

In The Times this morning.

boltonbonce wrote:

What if you are really friendly with them, do they shoot you in the head?

scottjames30 wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:

What if you are really friendly with them, do they shoot you in the head?

Only if you convert to islam

boltonbonce wrote:

xmiles wrote:Great cartoon bonce! Did you draw it yourself?

Ha,not me.

In The Times this morning.

Did you also read Thatcher lackey/ex Tory MP Matthew Parris's article that was also in this morning's Times in which he reluctantly agreed that Corbyn was right about not bombing Syria?

He hates Corbyn as much as anyone, but it's good to see that his disdain for Corbyn the person hasn't stopped him seeing the truth in what Corbyn is saying.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4626165.ece

rammywhite wrote:

Norpig wrote:i think people are now starting to think it may not have been such a good idea making him leader. I'm sure he's a lovely chap but his views are at odds with most of the Parliamentary Labour party and i would be amazed to see him last a year as leader.

I say keep him- we all need a good laugh from time to time and having this very principled nutter in charge provides us all with that good laugh. Give him another couple of years- then get shut and get a decent politician in before the next election

Unfortunately if it's three years down the road when Corbyn finally loses his arse lickers, then an election will be called straight away leaving Labour wrong footed! It'll have to happen in the next year or so I'm afraid, and unfortunately will still be in vain.
Thursday's election should be interesting.

Soul Kitchen wrote:

rammywhite wrote:

Norpig wrote:i think people are now starting to think it may not have been such a good idea making him leader. I'm sure he's a lovely chap but his views are at odds with most of the Parliamentary Labour party and i would be amazed to see him last a year as leader.

I say keep him- we all need a good laugh from time to time and having this very principled nutter in charge provides us all with that good laugh. Give him another couple of years- then get shut and get a decent politician in before the next election

Unfortunately if it's three years down the road when Corbyn finally loses his arse lickers, then an election will be called straight away leaving Labour wrong footed! It'll have to happen in the next year or so I'm afraid, and unfortunately will still be in vain.
Thursday's election should be interesting.

They can't call an election, we have a five year cycle now.

Thanks for that. Probably done to avert what I stated. I remember when it was always on the agenda for the Grantham Gremlin.

xmiles wrote:

Soul Kitchen wrote:

rammywhite wrote:

Norpig wrote:i think people are now starting to think it may not have been such a good idea making him leader. I'm sure he's a lovely chap but his views are at odds with most of the Parliamentary Labour party and i would be amazed to see him last a year as leader.

I say keep him- we all need a good laugh from time to time and having this very principled nutter in charge provides us all with that good laugh. Give him another couple of years- then get shut and get a decent politician in before the next election

Unfortunately if it's three years down the road when Corbyn finally loses his arse lickers, then an election will be called straight away leaving Labour wrong footed! It'll have to happen in the next year or so I'm afraid, and unfortunately will still be in vain.
Thursday's election should be interesting.

They can't call an election, we have a five year cycle now.

not completely true, we do have five year set period as you say, but under certain circs, and election can be held, as below. Given how fragmented support is for many flagship policies on both sides of the House, I wouldn't rule it out.
To call an election you need

• a motion of no confidence is passed in Her Majesty's Government by a simple majority and 14 days elapses without the House passing a confidence motion in any new Government formed
  
• a motion for a general election is agreed by two thirds of the total number of seats in the Commons including vacant seats (currently 434 out of 650)
  

People are generally happy with the Tories. The economy is stronger than most and the future is bright.

Natasha Whittam wrote:People are generally happy with the Tories. The economy is stronger than most and the future is bright.

You're rapidly turning into a parody of yourself.

Yes definitely the party of the working man and those with pinnochio noses!
Pigs fed and watered and ready to fly!!!

Natasha Whittam wrote:People are generally happy with the Tories. The economy is stronger than most and the future is bright.

Interested to hear what you've made of this Whittam -

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/01/osborne-reliant-on-rising-immigration-levels-to-achieve-budget-surplus

You've been happy enough with the lies that have been exposed so far as they've suited your views. But what about this?

You're becoming obsessed. The Tories are in power for a few more years, live with it.

You know I would shut the door on all immigrants which is certainly not Tory policy so I don't understand what your point is.

Just interested to see what you think. My point was that publicly the Tories claim they want to cut immigration to tens of thousands, yet behind closed doors it emerges they want to increase it to hit economic targets. So they seem to be misleading core voters like yourself by telling you one thing but doing another.

bwfc1874 wrote:Just interested to see what you think. My point was that publicly the Tories claim they want to cut immigration to tens of thousands, yet behind closed doors it emerges they want to increase it to hit economic targets. So they seem to be misleading core voters like yourself by telling you one thing but doing another.

Unless that article was written by George Osborne you're talking bollocks.

The Tories are the masters of ' smoke and mirrors ' politics.