Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Captain Turdseye]

10 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

On the first point, I don't buy the left wing witch hunt thing to be honest. I think they already accept there's a lot of lefties in the Labour party, they just don't put up with too much BS from them. As we saw this week, they don't put up with too much BS from anybody. 

 

The Sun, whilst I spit at it every opportunity I get from a personal perspective, you can surely see that a lot of people all over hte county read it. 

The Sun thing is almost unforgivable for me. He’ll have known how the people on or from Merseyside will have felt about it, and he’ll also have known that there’s no alternative to the Labour Party for them, so he did it anyway. 
 

Suck it up. 

[Rushies tash]

4 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

The Sun thing is almost unforgivable for me. He’ll have known how the people on or from Merseyside will have felt about it, and he’ll also have known that there’s no alternative for them to the Labour Party, so he did it anyway. 

Unfortunately, he'll have to appeal to a lot of the cunts who read that shite if they're going to get elected.

[torahboy]

At the party leadership hustings, at the Liverpool conference centre, that lying bastard Starmer drew a round of applause by stating that he wouldn't deal with the rag. To those now saying the party should unite behind Starmer, ask yourself where the lawyer's own loyalty was when Corbyn was leader. Now, Starmer's treatment of his predecessor has moved from political manoeuvring to pure, petulant, immature spite. The Labour Party as it is and, I presume, as Starmer and his acolytes will keep it, is not an electoral option for many misled socialists.

[Captain Turdseye]

1 hour ago, torahboy said:

At the party leadership hustings, at the Liverpool conference centre, that lying bastard Starmer drew a round of applause by stating that he wouldn't deal with the rag. To those now saying the party should unite behind Starmer, ask yourself where the lawyer's own loyalty was when Corbyn was leader. Now, Starmer's treatment of his predecessor has moved from political manoeuvring to pure, petulant, immature spite. The Labour Party as it is and, I presume, as Starmer and his acolytes will keep it, is not an electoral option for many misled socialists.

I want to rep that but I’m scared it’ll get me suspended. 

[sir roger]

I've already wiped the Starmer dust off my shoes so I will do it for you.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

FWIW, here's the traitor having his say about Ukraine.

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

‘To say bring anti-war is a weakness…’

 

Who is he talking about there? 
 

The sentiment is right in his video but the reality is Russia attacked somebody and continue to do so. Saying we should listen to those wanting peace is ideal, but not really practical when bombs are dropping. We all want it to end peacefully, but wanting isn’t enough.

[Section_31]

All ordinary people want peace and nuclear disarmament, but the Trident/NATO debate makes me think of a line from Deep Space Nine: 

 

"The Federation needs men like you, Doctor. Men of conscience, men of principle... men who can sleep at night. You're also the reason Section 31 exists. Someone has to protect men like you from a universe that doesn't share your sense of right and wrong."

[SasaS]

The problem with Corbyn's video, apart from the empty rhetoric that we must talk and not make war (well, yeah) and the fact that yet again, he avoided the words "Russian aggression on Ukraine", is that he thinks negotiations should go back to what was allegedly promised 30 years ago, so, no NATO in the east, which is what the aggressor wants and which was done without consulting the wishes of people in the Ukraine, many of them not yet born at the time. As if Russia would then leave neutral, demilitarized Ukraine alone, to try to join the EU, or build a proper democracy.

It is yet again this assumption you can find in Chomsky, Pilger etc, and is no being picked up by parts of the right wing, that it is all about the relationship of superpowers, those that were that at the time, ignoring the will, fears, history of the Ukrainians (a type of orientalism in itself or intellectual laziness which would need decolonializing). That Russia has a right to demand what foriegn policy would other countries pursue, what alliance would they join, as a price for peace. Also, many people don't realize how much new, regional powers influence what is going on around them, those on the anti-American left seem for ever stuck in the Cold War divisions and opposition to American imperialism as the only factor.

[Bjornebye]

Nothing he says will ever be right for some people, even when asking for peace. 

[House of Dirk]

2 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Nothing he says will ever be right for some people, even when asking for peace. 

Watch some Tory cunt say the same thing in a different way in a weeks time and watch the Tory populace salivate over it.

Fucking pig sick of it.

[Creator Supreme]

18 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Nothing he says will ever be right for some people, even when asking for peace. 

 

14 minutes ago, House of Dirk said:

Watch some Tory cunt say the same thing in a different way in a weeks time and watch the Tory populace salivate over it.

Fucking pig sick of it.

This, lock the thread now, the doubters got their wish, he's not even got the Labour whip anymore.

[SasaS]

5 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Nothing he says will ever be right for some people, even when asking for peace. 

But that is the problem, he should have asked for peace, call Russian aggression for what it is in no uncertain terms and demanded they withdraw their troops from Ukraine, as a precondition for any talks. And end the speech there. You cannot ask for peace by basically implying, the aggressor has some reasonable demands. Which BTW are imposing its will on people of another country. That is the very nature of serving as an apologist.

The only way this and any future war stated by Russia can be stopped or prevented is by presenting a united global front against aggression, completely isolate the aggressor and refuse to consider any of its demands until the aggression stops or is beaten back. And hope other forces in Russia will eventually prevail.

[Numero Veinticinco]

I agree with, Corbyn; I want peace too. Now, back to the real world and the complex situation unfolding in Europe because of the reckless actions of a gangster and his gangster state. 

That’s how I feel when I see him in that video. It’s so fucking easy to say that we should skip the fighting and go straight to peace. Yes, we SHOULD. But back in the real world, that’s not what’s happening and I’m doubtful his video is going to convince Putin. So who is he speaking to? What good does it do for us to sit here and be morally superior calling for everyone to back down and talk it through when you’ve got an invader in your country?

[Bjornebye]

14 minutes ago, SasaS said:

But that is the problem, he should have asked for peace, call Russian aggression for what it is in no uncertain terms and demanded they withdraw their troops from Ukraine, as a precondition for any talks. And end the speech there. You cannot ask for peace by basically implying, the aggressor has some reasonable demands. Which BTW are imposing its will on people of another country. That is the very nature of serving as an apologist.

The only way this and any future war stated by Russia can be stopped or prevented is by presenting a united global front against aggression, completely isolate the aggressor and refuse to consider any of its demands until the aggression stops or is beaten back. And hope other forces in Russia will eventually prevail.

A life long pacifist calling for peace or if you want to dress it up like a Tory would, an apologist bending over for Russia. 

[Pureblood]

15 minutes ago, SasaS said:

The only way this and any future war stated by Russia can be stopped or prevented is by presenting a united global front against aggression, completely isolate the aggressor and refuse to consider any of its demands until the aggression stops or is beaten back.

Hmm, maybe we could call it "NATO".  

[M_B]

Good video that. Peace would be great. If he could just tell that to the man in charge of Russia who publicly stated and wrote that Ukraine should not exist then that would be ace.

[Bjornebye]

"apologist"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder why certain quarters would want to invent him being some sort of apologist for Russian aggression 

 

 

 

 

 

[SasaS]

6 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

A life long pacifist calling for peace or if you want to dress it up like a Tory would, an apologist bending over for Russia. 

I have no idea how a Tory would dress it or why would a Tory bother dressing it since they probably view him with a great deal of nostalgia. None of these old antiimperialists live in a real world. Fortunately, most of them are nowhere near actual decision making.

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, SasaS said:

I have no idea how a Tory would dress it or why would a Tory bother dressing it since they probably view him with a great deal of nostalgia. None of these old antiimperialists live in a real world. Fortunately, most of them are nowhere near actual decision making.

Christ. 

[SasaS]

19 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Christ. 

You are full of good points.

[Bjornebye]

Just now, SasaS said:

You are full of good points.

I made my points above that you have ignored. 

[Pureblood]

So he's unequivocally condemned Russia's aggression and also wants peace talks. Scum, out of touch scum. 

[Creator Supreme]

41 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Christ. 

Yep, I'm glad I've got him on ignore!

[SasaS]

11 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

I made my points above that you have ignored. 

I don't think I did, other than the life long peace activist bit. I wasn't commenting in terms of British politics, I commented on the video in a broader context. I think the statement is detrimental to the cause of peace and is in part self-serving, as in, sends the wrong message as a whole. It isn't helping the peace effort. Demands Putin made before the invasion were deliberately formed so as to be unacceptable. He wanted to invade, he doesn't want to talk at the moment, that is the reality of the situation. Therefore, Putin, as the aggressor should be met by a united front. Corbyn refers to himself as a prescient minority voice of dissent or something. Now it's not the time for that.  This only encourages the aggressor.