Although unfortunately, in the grown up world, there is no money available, for fanciful things such as removing the 2 child benefit cap, re-nationalising failing utilities and industries or investing in the NHS, Sir Keir St*rmer is delighted to announce that should 'his' (sic) Labour Party take power, he will be purchasing 4 shiny new multi billion pound subs with all the extras and trimmings, alloy wheels, fluffy dice, chequered sticky tape down both sides and a 'KEITH' and 'MAGGIE' sign at the top of the windscreen. Unlike his snowflake woke predecessor who crazily refused to even press the button to bring about the destruction of the human race, Sir Kid Starver would do it in a heartbeat. No problem! Kill 'em all! Let god sort 'em out! Woo hoo! Meanwhile there are warnings that those who have an iota of ethics or humanity are thinking twice about voting for Sir Keith. Supposedly safe seats are in danger. Tell me @Moose and other potential voters for this person as the country's leaders. Are you still going to vote for him? At what point will you say enough is enough?
I’m not sure what has changed here. Corbyn did not promise to get rid of our nuclear deterrent. He just fudged over its use. Starmer is simply being more enthusiastic. While Russian officials talk about how their missiles are targeted on London and up the nuclear rhetoric, there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of us disarming. Hardly surprising that Starmer is taking the stance he is and taking the opportunity to assure those union leaders, whose members work in the defence sector, that their jobs are safe. I’m unmoved. The priority for me is getting rid of the Tories. A Labour Government won’t do everything that I want it to, but politics doesn’t stop if it’s elected. But it’s the only game in town if you want to see a selection of Tory faces looking like smacked arses on election night.
Clive's alternative manifesto: Recognise Britain's modern standing as a medium level state on the international level. Resign from NATO. Close US bases in Britain. End Nuclear weapon program. Reduce 'defence' spending from 2.3% of GDP currently to less than 0.5% Reduce military manpower to an absolute minimum. We don't need 'boots on the ground' these days. Retaining masses armies is like keeping Calvary units in ww1 against machine guns. Invest remaining spending on things like drones, training civilian volunteer units to spot and deal with things such as bombers or armed/car attacks. Use the billions saved to repair the country and make it worth defending in the first place.
I understand and admire your principles Clive but what is the alternative? Unfortunately, under fptp, we are going to end up with another Tory or Labour government. There is a chance of a hung parliament but that would just result in a coalition with the Libs. None of those outcomes will result in disarmament and the money transferred to social spending. Until we get some kind of PR, voting for anyone other than the big 3 in England (with the exception of the Greens in Brighton) is a nothing more than a protest vote. Even "Reform", with a predicted support of up to 16% will end up with zero seats. I will vote Labour (while holding my nose) simply because they have the best chance of beating the Tories in my constituency. What I want more than anything though is electoral reform. Then we would see proper democracy with the ability to vote for the candidates that you want, not the "least worse".
I'm not overly bothered by this (let's face it, there are more likely sources of worldwide armageddon that the UK), but I'm not convinced by your first para and the notion that nothing has changed. Did Corbyn ever suggest he was going to enhance the UK's nuclear deterrent, or defence in general?
Corbyn promised to keep defence spending at the level it was, 2%. It’s risen since then and Starmer’s pledge is broadly in line with that, with a nebulous promise for a bit extra when things possible. Given that the outlook for NATO as a whole has changed and across the members more spending is required, this is very little to shout about, a change in tone rather than anything else. https://www.forces.net/news/general...eader-jeremy-corbyn-answers-defence-questions
I did last time but that didn't turn out well! The Libs might chose the Tories as partners again. It's very difficult to vote for a coalition and there is no guarantee that the Tories or Labour would concede to PR as a condition. But I wouldn't be upset to wake up the day after the election with a Lab-Lib coalition.
Where is this plan for Labour to ‘enhance’ the nuclear deterrent? The plans for renewal are already there. He’s simply talking about doing the work here.
Let's get the Tories out and then start again. And just hope there are a few people in the PLP who will regain their principles and backbone once safely in power, although you know what they say about power. Hopefully the food shortages and massive price increases later in the year (bookmark this) with our homegrown food decimated by flooded fields and with import checks and charges reducing food from elsewhere, will result in reality kicking in, and if you are going to 'betray' the Daily Express readers over the Single Market and Customs Union, you might as well go the whole hog and reinstate your green agenda, and set up safe asylum routes.
The Beeb announced 4 new Dreadnoughts (see also Clive's post). But is that spin? I couldn't see that commitment in the web articles I read. He has suggested that defence spending be raised to 2.5%GDP.
‘When conditions allow it.’ I’d file that with phrases like The Tories are the Party of low taxes. An election is coming, is what I’m hearing.
Should Cuba cut its defence spending to 0.5% too? They spend far more than we do (relatively speaking) and have more than twice the size of army per capita.
Well yes, but that’s my point, it’s presentation only. Both promise to keep spending as it is while making vague noises about something else. Next.
We must make sure we have nukes so we can kill as many of the aggressor as we can as we all die. Never mind that most of joe public in any country doesnt want to kill joe public from other nations and just want a quiet life though, the majority dont get a say. All the people that make any decision to go to nuclear war will be safely hidden underground with years of rations and probably underground food growing facilities, it wont really affect them. Im hoping this is real https://ufohastings.com/ . Absolutely loads of stories of nuclear facilities worldwide being visited. Makes me wonder about the nuke "tests" we had worldwide and where they were. Absolutely no need to test such a destructive weapon so many times once the theory was proven and how you could scale them up for bigger explosions.
The thing I really find odd is the serving military's love affair with the Tories. Guess which party has dished out the P45s during strategic defence reviews...
As we're obviously terrified of taking any military action that might upset Putin what's the point of having the subs? It's like spending hundreds of pounds on fireworks and not letting them off
Labours two issues with a coalition are LibDems will only agree if Labour rejoin the EU Including the things we didn't participate in before: Schengen Agreement, the Economic & Monetary Union, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the area of freedom, security and justice & the Social Chapter (I think) Labour would loose so much trust from their red wall voters, it would kill them in 2029. The SNP would insist on another Scottish Independence Referendum. Again long term this would be harmful, losing so many votes for Labour in the future. Any coalition isn't good for Labour, they have to win in outright to protect themselves longer term. Going back to the original post, KS is saying all the right things to win over the middle Englander more liberal Tories. His whole, well orchestrated, campaign is setout to capture those votes.
Yes, Labour’s campaign is pitched very carefully to attract those in the middle. It’s pee’d off some on the left, but they don’t seem to take into account that losing 100k of them to gain 1m votes in the centre is a no-brainer in electoral terms and many working class people, who the left urges the Labour Party to listen to, have quite cautious, mainstream, sometimes nationalistic politics. The Lib Dems and SNP can demand whatever they like in the event of a hung parliament, but they won’t get either of the demands you mention above, at least not in the short-term. They’ll have to settle for something less, probably a ‘supply and confidence’ approach. I think the Libs would accept a closer relationship with the EU and allow that to gather ground. However, the Tories are so awful at the moment it’s not easy to see a hung parliament happening.
If there’s one thing any sane person has learnt from Ukraine, it’s that being a liberal country not part of NATO and unilaterally giving up nuclear weapons is extremely stupid for your own self preservation.
I think this needs sending to the Russian Ambassador. Russian military spending is 6% of GDP. Russian spending on all Welfare (excluding pensions) is 0.6% of GDP. The UK spends as much on defence as it does on disability benefits alone. Both are 2% of GDP.
