Will Jeremy Corbyn Be Dangerous Should He Becomes Pm?

[willbewhatiwill]

The following three considerations (amongst many) could well occur should Jeremy Corbyn becomes PM:

(1) Open door policies for immigrants and refugees from all corners of the earth - causing disharmony & strive. As long as there are perceived opposing differences in ‘culture’ & ‘religion’ amongst residents of a country there will be separate lifestyles & hence potential disharmony & friction.

(2) Corbynmania is dangerous as lack of creditable defence cause wars, as tin-pot dictators only understand military force, not negotiations. Should Corbyn manage to introduce his CND policies, which he espouse, UK will FOEVER be threatened and bullied militarily (lost of sovereignty) by present & future nuclear powers. Nuclear deterrent has kept the peace between the superpowers since WW2 (over 70 years ago). UK use her nuclear deterrence everyday to deter (and insure) against the most extreme treats from existing nuclear powers (and against those countries are desperate seeking to become nuclear powers). Also, hot pursuit of terrorists can be regarded as self-defence or confrontation of aggression/crime against humanity - like police force do. The modus operandi of megalomaniac power crazy dictators is not negotiations (as Jeremy Corbyn mistakenly keep repeating parrot fashion), but military strength.

(3) Jeremy Corbyn is keen to give-in to demands for Scottish independent referendum. Only Westminster Parliament (not devolved Parliaments) has the legislative competence whether to allow (with the approval of the monarch) an independent referendum to any home nation (like Scotland). It is also for Westminster Parliament to decide on the wording of the referendum question, date & suffrage franchise of voters in the independence referendum. Also, Scottish residents that was able to vote in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum included current Scottish residents who were: British citizens, commonwealth students & workers, Irish citizen, EU citizens living Scotland at the time.The franchise of voters for any future independence referendum (should they ever occur again) should be only be for British citizens born in Scotland (including Scottish expats), regardless of whether or not they are currently living in Scotland at the time.

[willbewhatiwill]

mikey4444,

North Korea militarily threatening and making invasion gestures towards Singapore could well be a possibility in a few decades. Who knows what would happen in the future,

Being well armed (& credible militarily) is Britain's insurance policy from being threatened & oppressed by other countries.

[mikey4444]

This is getting tiresome ! Paranoia rules it would seem.

I don't think I can add anything new to what I have already said on this subject.

[Togo]

Of course he won't. Be positively Utopian. All local Gov, N.H, Civil Service,Council, Police and Social service workers will be earning £1million a year with 30 weeks holiday entitlement and 32 weeks guaranteed sick leave. Trains will not be allowed to move in the interests of safety, Scotland and Wales will be presented with full independence and the people of England will be forced to pay for it. The armed forces will be disbanded and the personnel will have any assets seized under the proceeds of crime laws and the equipment will be given to the IRA and Hezbollah as part of the new and exciting foreign aid commitments. The nuclear fleet and aircraft to be donated to N. Korea on the understanding that they are not used against the UK unless a Tory Government takes office. Any resident who has lived in their own home for more than 10 years and who had grandparents who were born in the UK must give up their homes to the latest immigrants arriving by the shipload aboard the confiscated cruise liners and Oil Tankers. etc. etc.

[youngmafbog]

About sums it up Togo.

[willbewhatiwill]

mikey4444,

Try telling anyone who bought an insurance policy 'paranoid' then - when in fact they are being cautious and realistic (not in cloud cuckooland).

Scrapping UK's nuclear deterrent/insurance policy, in a dangerous world, can cause more conflict & disorder.

[willbewhatiwill]

Jeremy Corbyn would happier to attend a ‘refugee welcoming party’ than singing the ‘God save the Queen’, attending commendation victory during Battle of Britain in WWIII and/or Privy Council.

[willbewhatiwill]

I meant "...attending commendation victory during Battle of Britain in WW2 and/or Privy Council".

[cassa333]

WillbewhatIwill, you have made the grave mistake of using the example of N Korea and Singapore as something that 'could' happen but at the moment is 'highly unlikely' to happen and some people can't get past the example and they simply get bogged down in the detail of that rather than looking at the bigger picture of how overall of how a nuclear deterrent works.

[Togo]

Lol Willbe, Ta. Thing is the best gags always have a ring of truth about them. :))

[willbewhatiwill]

cassa333,
Here is another example then.

North Korea cease a British Warship and threatened the RN personnel on board the cruiser with execution. UK demanded to return of the British personnel and warship forthwith. North Korea responded to non-nuclear armed UK to the effect, "Come and attack me if you wish and I will annihilate you with my ICBMs"

[cassa333]

I don't need another example I understood the concept of what you were saying right away. Some people were nitpicking at the N Korea to try to discredit the bigger picture you were saying.

[scooping]

Can't remember a day when people's views have been so intemporate, shallow and unoriginal.

[scooping]

As for this effort it must surely been copied from an old CSE civics paper, later rejected for being too trite.

[willbewhatiwill]

cassa333 stated, "some people can't get past the example and they simply get bogged down in the detail of that rather than looking at the bigger picture of how overall of how a nuclear deterrent works".

I agreed with you straight away and know you immediately understood. I was only trying to give another example for those who feel my first analogy about North Korea is far-fetched.

[scooping]

What's a 'commendation victory' for heaven's sake?

[Old_Geezer]

Seems such a shame that the public invariably vote for the charismatic politicians with ill-conceived objectives rather than those politicians with good, well-conceived objectives. C'est la vie.

[willbewhatiwill]

scooping,

What I wrote in these threads are my original opinions, perceptions, thought processes. I form my arguments and opinions easily off-the-cuff, not certainly not plagiarism!

Such accusers about plagiarism are those who are the ones (the accusers) who are actually bereft of ideas and having poor abilities to write articles.

[Old_Geezer]

Nuclear weaponry has less clout these days what with politicians suggesting they'd be loathe to make a snap decision in the minutes before a possible strike. Add to that tales of nuclear winters and one wonders if a vastly increased conventional military hasn't more deterrence. It's in the balance at the moment, one can argue either way. As for NK, I've no doubt any erratic leader can order stupid things, but the answer is to make them impotent rather than threaten with a bigger club. Ensure risky leaders (and the powers behind them) are outmanoeuvred and become irrelevant. Ensure they achieve no ability to obtain a valid threat.

[scooping]

Willbe: pretentious claptrap.

[scooping]

And willbe: Your spelling is about the only original thing about the question.