Politics 2024/25 General Election Voting Intention (2022)

[Scouse]

You actually think he gives a shit about the Chagos islands?

I don't know. But I haven't "changed my politics" if I ask the question.

Do you actually think he gives a shit about the Chagos islands? I think he might.

 

[Tom]

I don't really understand why anyone is annoyed about those islands. I bet most people couldn't find them on a map. And most people seem not to understand that without such a deal, the UK might lose sovereignty over those islands completely. Which puts that big base on Diego Garcia in a pickle.

 

[Scouse]

I don't really understand why anyone is annoyed about those islands.

The people who live there wanted self-determination.

I don't know why anyone is annoyed about Greenland eh? There's only a handful of people there and if the US doesn't have it the Chinese or Russians might put us in a bit of a pickle eh?

Self-determination. That's really the issue here.

 

[DaGaffer]

The people who live there wanted self-determination.

I don't know why anyone is annoyed about Greenland eh? There's only a handful of people there and if the US doesn't have it the Chinese or Russians might put us in a bit of a pickle eh?

Self-determination. That's really the issue here.

Who's self-determination? The Chagossians can't seem to decide amongst themselves whether they want to be Mauritian or independent. If Britain had given up the islands in the 1960s they'd have been Mauritian anyway, so the treaty currently going through is the effectively the status quo ante. But some Chagossians don't want that, and why? Could it be they want the giant $100m a year pay day from the 99 year lease back of Diego Garcia rather than Mauritius? Because this is the thing, the Chaggosians aren't going back to Diego Garcia; US/UK is keeping the island one way or another anyway, it's just a matter of who get's paid.

As for Rosindell, he seems to want the British to keep the islands as their own no matter what, but at the same time says giving the islands to Mauritius (which is what the ICJ told Britain to do) is a "betrayal of the Chagossian people" even though Britain is the country that forced them off their islands in the first place and has done fuck all to meaningfully improve their lot. Call me a big old cynic but I'm not seeing principles, I'm seeing Pound signs for someone.

 

[Tom]

I don't know why anyone is annoyed about Greenland eh? There's only a handful of people there and if the US doesn't have it the Chinese or Russians might put us in a bit of a pickle eh?

This really is a very silly reply. The UK stands to lose Diego Garcia permanently without this deal. Greenland is being threatened with invasion by a racist, rapist, child-abusing deviant of a president, for no other reason than his drug-addled brain thinks its a good idea.

 

[Scouse]

I'm seeing Pound signs for someone.

Yeah, but not for this MP, lest you forget.

The Chagossians aren't being asked. They're not at the centre of the decision making. They're not getting to self-determine.

You can't fix history, you can only do the right thing in the present. And as far as I can see, this guy has resigned because they're not getting the right to self-determine. We're doing a deal without asking the people. Again.

This really is a very silly reply. The UK stands to lose Diego Garcia permanently without this deal.

And what do the people want eh? We don't care to ask them?

We asked the Greenlanders unofficially btw - and they want neither Denmark (who have been horrible to them) nor America. They want self determination too.

Funny old world isn't it. People seem to want a choice in their own lives.

 

[DaGaffer]

Yeah, but not for this MP, lest you forget.

The Chagossians aren't being asked. They're not at the centre of the decision making. They're not getting to self-determine.

You can't fix history, you can only do the right thing in the present. And as far as I can see, this guy has resigned because they're not getting the right to self-determine. We're doing a deal without asking the people. Again.


And what do the people want eh? We don't care to ask them?

We asked the Greenlanders unofficially btw - and they want neither Denmark (who have been horrible to them) nor America. They want self determination too.

Funny old world isn't it. People seem to want a choice in their own lives.

Way to read nothing I wrote. His main objection is giving the islands back at all. And the Chagossians are not a country, not a territory, not anything, and they never were. You're talking about self-determination for something that never existed in the first place. The Chagossians would have been Mauritian, and indeed most of them are Mauritian, so if they wanted self-determination, that would be the country to be asking, and in fact that was the tenor of all the UN negotiation until it was realised Mauritius would be getting a big fat cheque from His Majesty's Government every year for the next century or so.

 

[Embattle]

Ironically, it seems Trump is expanding his hissy fit to the islands:

Trump calls UK plans to 'give away' US military base 'great stupidity'​

We have so far been focusing on Trump's position on Greenland. But the US president has also shared a message on the UK's plan to hand over the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean to Mauritius.

Here is the latest Truth Social from President Trump on the UK's Chagos Islands deal:

"Shockingly, our “brilliant” NATO Ally, the United Kingdom, is currently planning to give away the Island of Diego Garcia, the site of a vital U.S. Military Base, to Mauritius, and to do so FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER.

There is no doubt that China and Russia have noticed this act of total weakness. These are International Powers who only recognize STRENGTH, which is why the United States of America, under my leadership, is now, after only one year, respected like never before.

The UK giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY, and is another in a very long line of National Security reasons why Greenland has to be acquired.

Denmark and its European Allies have to DO THE RIGHT THING. Thank you for your attention to this matter. PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP"

Last year, Trump indicated he would be prepared to back the UK's deal to hand over sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

 

[DaGaffer]

Ironically, it seems Trump is expanding his hissy fit to the islands:

Even though he signed off on the deal himself a few months ago ...

Donald Trump signs off Keir Starmer’s controversial Chagos Islands deal

UK and Mauritius now finalising deal, No 10 confirms after US president approves agreement

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Gwadien]

That's because he's gone from isolationist to world police in about 15 minutes.

Bonkers.

 

[Raven]

Trump is quite clearly, genuinely, bonkers, and it any normal country, would be quietly (or not so...) replaced.

 

[Tom]

When I watched that Civil War film I thought "hmmm, bit unrealistic". Honestly, now I'm not so sure. If he decides that elections are meaningless, I can see the US descending into war.

 

[Scouse]

So then. Grauniad reports this:

Trump says his fear with Nato is, “we spend tremendous amounts of money with Nato, and I know we’ll come to their rescue but I really do question whether or not they’ll come to ours.”

Discuss?

 

[Scouse]

Trump is quite clearly, genuinely, bonkers, and it any normal country, would be quietly (or not so...) replaced.

You mean, by ballot?

 

[Embattle]

So then. Grauniad reports this:



Discuss?

Bollocks, only one country has used article 5.

 

[Scouse]

Not what I asked.

There's an awful lot of hate for America, not just on FH, but wider.

 

[Gwadien]

So then. Grauniad reports this:



Discuss?

Sure.

When he's threatening military action against a NATO member he can shut the fuck up.

 

[Scouse]

When he's threatening military action against a NATO member he can shut the fuck up.

So, would we go to America's aid?

 

[Embattle]

So, would we go to America's aid?

At the moment yes, if he does something in Greenland then no, I suspect NATO would fall apart fast anyway in such circumstances.

 

[Scouse]

He's not going to invade Greenland. His whole schtick is to create drama and emotion then negotiate something far from the worry. I don't know why people are taking that seriously. It's a negotiating tactic, nothing more.

If he invades greenland I'll eat @Gwadien's dick.

 

[DaGaffer]

So then. Grauniad reports this:



Discuss?

Until Trump, yes, NATO would always step up. Now? probably, but any hesitation is because of him.

 

[Gwadien]

He's not going to invade Greenland. His whole schtick is to create drama and emotion then negotiate something far from the worry. I don't know why people are taking that seriously. It's a negotiating tactic, nothing more.

If he invades greenland I'll eat @Gwadien's dick.

So why are you taking him seriously?

 

[caLLous]

He's not going to invade Greenland. His whole schtick is to create drama and emotion then negotiate something far from the worry. I don't know why people are taking that seriously. It's a negotiating tactic, nothing more.

If he invades greenland I'll eat @Gwadien's dick.

Phew, as long as it's only a bit of extortion.

 

[Scouse]

So why are you taking him seriously?

In what way? He's the most powerful man in the world, but you don't have to believe the bluster.

Phew, as long as it's only a bit of extortion.

Businessman. Loads of 'em are like this. Bluff and bluster.

I mean, does anyone round here seriously think they'll invade?

We hate Trump largely because of his behaviour.

 

[Scouse]

Until Trump, yes, NATO would always step up. Now? probably, but any hesitation is because of him.

So he's got a point. He's all it took to say "fuck all America"?

Lets face it - anti-American feeling has been growing in at least blighty since the 80's.

 

[caLLous]

So he's got a point. He's all it took to say "fuck all America"?

Lets face it - anti-American feeling has been growing in at least blighty since the 80's.

Over a dozen NATO members leapt to help the US (without them even asking for it - NATO invoked Article 5 on their behalf) in 2001 and dozens of Danish in particular died in doing so (which makes all this Greenland nonsense all the more abhorrent). What are you talking about?

Now, though? Now the US is acting more like a belligerent than an ally? I'm sure they all still would because they're the ones trying to maintain order but Trump? He'd want something out of it because we've seen how transactional he is time and time again.

Businessman. Loads of 'em are like this. Bluff and bluster.

Bullshit, it's extortion. He's using the threat of the might of the biggest military in the world to get what he wants. That's more mob boss than businessman.

I mean, does anyone round here seriously think they'll invade?

The fact that there's even a discussion about whether the US President might invade and capture a territory of a NATO member is not ok. He has no valid reason for wanting it other than to satisfy his narcissism. The US can put as many bases and troops on Greenland as they want, as agreed with Denmark in 1951, so the "we need it to defend ourselves" and "the future of peace depends on us getting it" lines are bullshit. He *wants* Greenland, he doesn't *need* Greenland.

 

[Scouse]

Over a dozen NATO members leapt to help the US (without them even asking for it - NATO invoked Article 5 on their behalf) in 2001 and dozens of Danish in particular died in doing so (which makes all this Greenland nonsense all the more abhorrent). What are you talking about?

I think you're attributing undue importance to a virtue-signalling sympathy invocation over a quarter of a century ago - which wasn't unanimously supported (because it's supposed to be invoked under a direct attack by a state actor). It was simply symbolic to the shocking terrorist attacks.

I said growing anti-Americanism. And we're further away from 2001 than 2001 is from 1980, so it's had a lot of time to grow.

The boob whisperer himself (who's incredibly popular by all counts, especially amongst women (inexplicably)), is advocating for our withdrawal from NATO and a review of the presence of US forces in Britain. And the greens aren't exactly niche any more - some polls put them ahead of Labour (in Wales, in 3rd place ahead of both Labour and Tories).

The bubbling, growing, anti-Americanism is beginning to surface. Trump is enboldening, absolutely, but it's not simply some dumb knee-jerk reaction - it's been becoming more front-and-centre for decades.

 

[Scouse]

Bullshit, it's extortion. He's using the threat of the might of the biggest military in the world to get what he wants. That's more mob boss than businessman.

There's not a single senior politician that's taking that seriously. That messaging is for the plebs (us).

 

[Scouse]

The fact that there's even a discussion about whether the US President might invade and capture a territory of a NATO member is not ok.

Where do you think I'm saying it's OK?

Take a step back. I'm not supporting Trump. But because of the rabid tribalism that's infected the forum rational, emotion-free, intellectual discussion seems to have exited somewhat. We know this is just a tactic - his modus operandi - so we should take what he says, and understand what he actually wants.

He has no valid reason for wanting it other than to satisfy his narcissism. The US can put as many bases and troops on Greenland as they want, as agreed with Denmark in 1951, so the "we need it to defend ourselves" and "the future of peace depends on us getting it" lines are bullshit. He *wants* Greenland, he doesn't *need* Greenland.

Greenland will be strategic from a minerals point of view. China's got 'em all. The US needs to stay ahead. Resources are what matters.

My first (semi-serious) point on this was he could try do it democratically - he could offer $1m for each person in Greenland and have them vote, and a majority would likely say "yes". He'd be able to pick it up for less than the cost of HS2. And buying countries, whilst unusual in our lifetime, isn't that big of a deal. There's plenty of precedent. And, frankly, it'd just be another border change amongst the thousands. If it was done that way - with the people themselves having a say - then I wouldn't blink tbh.

 

[caLLous]

The bit where you say "haha I can't believe you're taking him seriously" is where you said it's ok. "Lol it's just Trump, guys". He's the fucking US President, his outrageous bullshit shouldn't be normalised just because this thing is more outrageous than whatever the last outrageous thing was.

Greenland is over 3 times the size of Texas and has a grand total of 70 miles of paved roads. It'll be decades before extracting minerals is anywhere near the table, let alone on it.

And a country's inhabitants can't sell their country ffs. Greenland could vote to be independent of Denmark but not to join the US and anyway, there are Greenlandic/Danish/international laws about paying people to vote one way or another. On top of all of that, the US doesn't exactly have a stellar track record when it comes to its treatment of Native peoples on its own turf and Greenland is mostly Indigenous, so... not really compatible. It's not all about money.