Jump to content

General Election 2017


ender4

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Brumstopdogs said:

Corbyn after being asked questions on Trident:crylaugh:

giphy.gif

You mean, the question he was asked over and over again, whether he would push a big red button?

Totally pointless question. TWO nukes have been launched at people in human history. It simply should not be such a huge thing.

Who will nuke us? Iran? Nah. North Korea? They'd launch at multiple others before us.

Edited by StefanAVFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StefanAVFC said:

You mean, the question he was asked over and over again, whether he would push a big red button?

Totally pointless question. TWO nukes have been launched at people in human history. It simply should not be such a huge thing.

But sadly it is, among regular people. Because it is human nature to retaliate. This is why Corbyn is a bit buggered, because the public on the whole are blood thirsty. We want to be different and to evolve but bloody hell it is impossible to do it as quickly as Corbyn is proposing. If he does it, well it will be good news. If not, then let's all be reassured that nothing ever changes - plus my house price will be ok. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

You mean, the question he was asked over and over again, whether he would push a big red button?

Totally pointless question. TWO nukes have been launched at people in human history. It simply should not be such a huge thing.

Who will nuke us? Iran? Nah. North Korea? They'd launch at multiple others before us.

Clearly it matters to a lot of people that one day, a nuke, from North Korea, or perhaps Iran, or maybe even ISIS, will be launched, aimed at the UK, and the prime minister will only have 30 minutes to respond. Rather than dithering around, trying to get all possible information, it must be the case that the only solution is press the big red button that is presumably on his desk underneath some sort of glass casing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Awol said:

May had the better of that tonight so score draw over the two legs, imo. Still think she'll win the final though. 

We all see things how we want to see them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jezza was brilliant until he was hammered by loads of angry old men that want to fry half the world alive.  

Strong finish too, he actually addressed the individual concerns of some people asking questions.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

I don't want any fallout but once people start throwing nuclear weapons around I doubt it would matter that much anyway.  

2 million percent this. We are a generation that looks at photos of people in Japan being de-skinned and think it can't possibly happen now. Yet we argue the toss about it. We don't feckin understand the question or the outcome. This is why we are as a people are probably doomed. 

Edited by Jareth
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dr_Pangloss said:

Clearly it matters to a lot of people that one day, a nuke, from North Korea, or perhaps Iran, or maybe even ISIS,

It simply will not happen.

And anyway, the questions were centred around whether he would strike first. Over and **** over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, peterms said:

For me, one reason is that they involve our government making detailed and specific plans showing which of us will be sacrificed, how many millons of us will die, in which zones and for what likely radius people will be immediately incinerated as opposed to having their flesh torn away and their eyes burnt out, as opposed to simply developing inoperable cancers and giving birth to babies with deformities so severe we cannot imagine them, while our lords and masters cower in bunkers.

These plans are a necessary part of "sitting at the top table", which is a central part of the political ambition of the people who want us to subscribe to this deranged vision.  Because if you don't ante up the cash, and make plans for presiding over the horrific death of the majority of your people, you can't be part of the club.

It would have been great for Corbyn to say something like this. Spell it out in great detail what people are asking him if he'll do. Make them feel really good about themselves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StefanAVFC said:

It simply will not happen.

And anyway, the questions were centred around whether he would strike first. Over and **** over again.

I know, just taking the piss, really was a farcical set of questioning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Clearly it matters to a lot of people that one day, a nuke, from North Korea, or perhaps Iran, or maybe even ISIS, will be launched, aimed at the UK, and the prime minister will only have 30 minutes to respond. Rather than dithering around, trying to get all possible information, it must be the case that the only solution is press the big red button that is presumably on his desk underneath some sort of glass casing.

surely he should be pushing a button that shoots down the nuke? which isnt what trident is, following that the yanks take over and we sit back and watch the world burn

i simply dont buy in to the theory that russia wont nuke us because we can nuke them back, in reality russia wont nuke us because despite the media agenda they really arent that big a word removed

i think us having them and trying to be billy big bollocks is us clinging on to the perceived place we have in the world, if nuclear war ever does come we wont be the main player, id doubt very much we'd even be in the supporting cast

Edited by villa4europe
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the Daily Mail is so central to Mays approach and philosophy, it is worth sharing this splendid article on the vile creature Dacre, and the unspeakable rag over which he presides,  like a hyena crouched over decaying meat.

Sample para, but read the whole thing:

Quote

Americans treat the National Enquirer as if it was a made-up scandal-rag intended for dummies, but the Daily Mail, weirdly, manages to hold its position as a respected newspaper in touch with the main currents of British life. In fact, the paper’s sales are down by one million since 2003 and the MailOnline audience is drawn mainly to the sleazy accounts of celebrity break-ups, wardrobe malfunctions and hidden cellulite that make up its notorious ‘sidebar of shame’. Politicians have to cosy up to survive its will to defame, and all Tories feel they have to take it seriously as a guide to the instincts of ‘Middle England’, even though its own staff feel it to be a virus more than a news outfit, a whole universe of rotten, in which a group of bullies get to miscall the world for money. In my weeks of reading the Mail in the wake of Addison’s book, I found no real humour but many hundreds of sneers, which is what passes for humour in that whispery world of frightened men who don’t know how to talk to women and wish they knew bigger words.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Nah, she was a snowflake. Nuke her.

Wouldn't be a first strike. No good. She got the shot off first, bloody commie should have pressed the button first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â