Politics The General Election 2015

[Raven]

We accept foreign aid?

 

[DaGaffer]

We accept foreign aid?

We would if anyone would give us any.

 

[Raven]

What I find disgusting and typical of the bleating masses that make up public opinion these days is that there are more people who care about what some stupid bitch said in a shitty newspaper than people who actually care that 800 men, women and children have drowned in a single sinking trying to escape countries that we have directly and indirectly tuned into absolute shit holes run by evil cunts.

I am sure there are plenty of awareness campaigns on facebook but they will literally make no difference whatsoever.

 

[DaGaffer]

What I find disgusting and typical of the bleating masses that make up public opinion these days is that there are more people who care about what some stupid bitch said in a shitty newspaper than people who actually care that 800 men, women and children have drowned in a single sinking trying to escape countries that we have directly and indirectly tuned into absolute shit holes run by evil cunts.

I am sure there are plenty of awareness campaigns on facebook but they will literally make no difference whatsoever.

As with so many things, its more nuanced than that. There was a good report in the Sunday Times this week describing the various people getting on these boats. For every one who's running from a failed state, there are half a dozen who just want a job. The people getting on boats in Libya, aren't, in the main, Libyans. Now, us bombing the crap out of Libya and removing Gadaffi for reasons that completely escape me has created conditions for people smugglers to act with impunity out of Libya, but they were doing it all along the North African coast anyway; the bigger failure here was the bullshit Italian "take away the coast guard and they'll be too scared to try to cross" malarky. A blatant cost-saving exercise that's blown up in their faces, and actually one of the (very) few areas where UKIP has a point; the EU is shockingly bad at managing its own borders, but it shouldn't just sit with the country where people happen to turn up; there should be a proper EU Coast Guard operation that covers the whole Med and is funded by everyone (including the UK), and yes, has the authority to send boats back to their point of origin if necessary. If it wasn't for potential kidnapping/Islamist danger, I'd also suggest EU migrant processing stations in Libya itself (like a giant Embassy basically), with "official" crossings for approved migrants.

 

[Moriath]

Dont think we did stuff in south sudan and places like that where people are coming from to go to italy.

 

[Scouse]

We have a space program?

Not just a program - a whole agency!

 

[Scouse]

Dont think we did stuff in south sudan and places like that where people are coming from to go to italy.

Really?

In 1899, Britain and Egypt reached an agreement under which Sudan was run by a governor-general appointed by Egypt with British consent. In reality Sudan was effectively administered as a British colony. The British were keen to reverse the process, started under Muhammad Ali Pasha, of uniting the Nile Valley under Egyptian leadership, and sought to frustrate all efforts aimed at further uniting the two countries.

During World War II, Sudan was directly involved militarily in the East African Campaign. Formed in 1925, the Sudan Defence Force (SDF) played an active part in responding to the early incursions (occupation by Italian troops of Kassala and other border areas) into the Sudan from Italian East Africa during 1940. In 1942, the SDF also played a part in the invasion of the Italian colony by British and Commonwealth forces. From 1924 until independence in 1956, the British had a policy of running Sudan as two essentially separate territories, the north (Muslim) and south (Christian). The last British Governor-General was Sir Robert Howe.

 

[Moriath]

Really?

1899 /1956. I meant recently to unstable the area. Like in libya

 

[Ormorof]

Well the divisions into north and south was persisted after independence and eventually broke into civil war, so the UN have been there a while being quite ineffective at stopping massacres it seems

 

[DaGaffer]

Really?

Sorry, they've had 60 years to get their shit together, and actually reading that Wiki it seems to me that the British were prescient enough to see that Sudan should have been two states in the first place. Reading that it looks like most of modern Sudan's ills are internal or Egyptian in nature.

 

[Scouse]

Sudan should have been two states in the first place.

Two of anything means more to fight against tbh...

 

[Moriath]

Two of anything means more to fight against tbh...

They were fighting before they were two.

 

[Job]

No easy answers here, people will always want to get to where the money and jobs are and the internet is only making it worse by allowing more and more people to see the inequality of life.
The first thing we need to do is get rescue ships out there and worry about the consequences later.
This is frickin Europe, we may bomb people, but we can't let them drown in front of us...shameful.

 

[Hawkwind]

We have a space program?

Nope the UK Space Agency is basically a funding port for the ESA projects and UK's efforts are a pretty small of that. Apart from BAE and some satellite manufacturing, mostly around Guildford. We basically do next to sod all which is a real shame because we have a lot of Satellite/Aerospace engineering capability and some of the best expertise. Just bugger all funding.

 

[old.user4556]

But we've spent tens of billions on illegal wars and plan to spend 100 billion on nukes, so we've got that going for us which is nice.

 

[Scouse]

But we've spent tens of billions on illegal wars and plan to spend 100 billion on nukes, so we've got that going for us which is nice.

I know. I guess hedging our bets on the outside chance of nuclear conflict to the tune of 100bn rather than splitting that in two and spending it on schools and the NHS is definitely worth it.

Certainly better than showing weakness by taking a principled lead on unilateral nuclear disarmament or something

 

[Gwadien]

More I think about it, the rationale for having nuclear weapons is kinda invalid.

I mean, as said before if a country did want to nuke us someone else would nuke them in return (ie if NK nuked us America would nuke them and if SK nuked us for what ever reason Russia would nuke them)

But anyway, you ain't exactly gonna get people calling it a bad political decision as they walk around an area in nuclear fallout.

I like fit how although Scotland hasnt accepted indepedence they want to get off the world stage and stop trying to unrealistically keep up with the rest of the worlds super powers.

I agree, scrap Trident. Or just have one, one would suffice for any kind of revenge.

 

[Zarjazz]

More I think about it, the rationale for having nuclear weapons is kinda invalid.

Well the counter argument to that is what country with nuclear weapons has ever been invaded? You could say that Russia only felt safe invading Crimea & Ukraine because they got rid of their nukes after the split from the USSR.

 

[Gwadien]

Well the counter argument to that is what country with nuclear weapons has ever been invaded? You could say that Russia only felt safe invading Crimea & Ukraine because they got rid of their nukes after the split from the USSR.

We're not in any threat to be invaded were too strategically important for both America and Russia for either to have absolute direct control over us, I highly doubt either nation would watch idlely as we get attacked.

Let's be honest here, we've not got trident for Russia, its for Iran and NK and those other loose cannons, if Russia got mad it would be total annihilation anyway.

 

[Job]

Seriously getting rid of our nukes would severely imbalance Europes defence strategy and dropping our defences to keep more old people alive and doleys in new TV's and mobility cars is hardly a good return.

 

[Moriath]

Its all a school yard game of mine is bigger than yours. Getting the school bully on your side so your less likely to be beaten up by the lesser bullys. Etcetc. Just bigger toys and higher stakes.

The nuke can never be uninvented. While its out there we wont give it up. Cause once gone we wont be allowed it back. And no one is ever sure of what the future brings.

 

[Scouse]

no one is ever sure of what the future brings.

If the future brings nuclear war we're fucked anyway - so why keep 'em.

 

[Gwadien]

Seriously getting rid of our nukes would severely imbalance Europes defence strategy and dropping our defences to keep more old people alive and doleys in new TV's and mobility cars is hardly a good return.

Lol you're silly.

We spend 113billion on the NHS, we spend 100billion on trident, we could literally double the NHS alternatively we could stop unemployment in its tracks, 100billion, fuck me.

 

[Scouse]

It'd be a major boost to the NHS or education. Of course, it's not annually, but still - more than either could possibly want.

Or services for the disabled or infirm. Or spunk the lot on blue-sky scientific research and a proper patententing system for UK discoveries...

 

[DaGaffer]

I know. I guess hedging our bets on the outside chance of nuclear conflict to the tune of 100bn rather than splitting that in two and spending it on schools and the NHS is definitely worth it.

Certainly better than showing weakness by taking a principled lead on unilateral nuclear disarmament or something

False dichotomy; even if Trident was scrapped it doesn't mean the NHS and education would get the cash; most of it would have to go back into conventional forces to meet our NATO % GDP commitment.

 

[Moriath]

Lol you're silly.

We spend 113billion on the NHS, we spend 100billion on trident, we could literally double the NHS alternatively we could stop unemployment in its tracks, 100billion, fuck me.

As scouse said its a one off spend. Actually split over years. Not that much every year.

 

[Scouse]

False dichotomy; even if Trident was scrapped it doesn't mean the NHS and education would get the cash; most of it would have to go back into conventional forces to meet our NATO % GDP commitment.

I think defence is ~2% without the commitment to trident.

Even if that was the case - conventional forces are more useful.

As scouse said its a one off spend. Actually split over years. Not that much every year.

Still a metric fuckton.

 

[Bodhi]

More I think about it, the rationale for having nuclear weapons is kinda invalid.

I mean, as said before if a country did want to nuke us someone else would nuke them in return (ie if NK nuked us America would nuke them and if SK nuked us for what ever reason Russia would nuke them)

But anyway, you ain't exactly gonna get people calling it a bad political decision as they walk around an area in nuclear fallout.

I like fit how although Scotland hasnt accepted indepedence they want to get off the world stage and stop trying to unrealistically keep up with the rest of the worlds super powers.

I agree, scrap Trident. Or just have one, one would suffice for any kind of revenge.

Or we could just keep Trident, keep our seat on the UN Security Council, and probably not get nuked in the first place.

Personally I'd rather we kept our big stick in case it's needed, as mentioned, if we get rid of it we might have issues getting another one. If it all goes titsup I'd really rather not hide behind the French and their big stick.

And as much as it pains me to say thus being a Scot, if they don't want it up north then just move it, I'm sure Portsmouth will appreciate the jobs. Sadly the SNP want the cake both possessed and consumed, they want to get rid of Trident and not have a nuclear deterrent, just stay part of NATO and use theirs instead.

And I see we are back with the theory that shoveling an extra £100 billion at the NHS will fix it. I mean it's budget has exploded in the last 15 years, but spent most of those years in crisis, but never mind eh, let's just keep throwing more money at it. Its other people's money, so it doesn't matter.

Best way to sort the NHS out would be to tackle the criminal amounts of waste that goes on in there, and start chopping all the layers of management so we can spend more on front line staff. Whilst I would be dead against privatising it (even though parts of it, like dentists and GP Surgeries have been privatised for a while now), some private sector initiatives like shared services and consolidation would work wonders.

Unfortunately such a suggestion would be political suicide, so we are unlikely to get that any time soon....

 

[Scouse]

Sun reader's view of the world

I'm not really sure there is criminal waste in the NHS any more...

 

[Gwadien]

As scouse said its a one off spend. Actually split over years. Not that much every year.

Nevertheless, that's still an extra billion for a hundred years better spent.

@Bodhi If we're a part of the UN security, why not use their nukes as deterrent if they're happy to have them?

I know this could easily be portrayed as being cuck-oo land, but it really does suck dick that we spend so much money on ending lives when there's some serious issues going on still