Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Can Agent Cob Really Be This Thick?
49 Answers
https:/
"NATO should be disbanded to bring peace" - Right oh Jezza, can you just imagine what Mad Vlad would be doing if NATO didn't exist? Perhaps he means bring peace by letting Russia annex more of the world! ....and to think millions voted for this eejit in 2019! MAABOF!
"NATO should be disbanded to bring peace" - Right oh Jezza, can you just imagine what Mad Vlad would be doing if NATO didn't exist? Perhaps he means bring peace by letting Russia annex more of the world! ....and to think millions voted for this eejit in 2019! MAABOF!
Answers
“NATOs existence did not deter Putin in the slightest from invading” Er, that’s because Ukraine isn’t in NATO! And furthermore when Putin first invaded Ukraine in 2014 there wasn’t a single tank in the NATO forward area. Not one. It never ceases to amaze how many would slit their own throats rather than stand up for an alliance dedicated to protecting us from …...
07:39 Mon 25th Apr 2022
Although I bow to no-one in my contempt for Mr Corbyn and his increasing inability to inhabit Planet Earth with the rest of us, I feel I must come to his defence on this issue.
Sir Keir said this about Mr Corbyn's position -
'"I've also made it clear that our position in the Labour Party is not to accept the false equivalence between Russian aggression and the acts of Nato."
Which is all very well, but that's not what Mr Corbyn said.
He said, quote -
""I don't blame Nato for the fact that Russia has invaded Ukraine. What I say is look at the thing historically, and look at the process that could happen at the end of the Ukraine war."
That's pretty clear as I read it - Mr Corbyn is categorically not blaming Nato for the situation in Ukraine, and furthermore, he is advocating the potential disbanding of Nato to be discussed when the Ukrainian conflict is concluded, whenever that may be.
Therefore, although I normally scoff along with majority at Mr Corbyn's frankly barmy assessments of what is going on in the world, on this occasion, although I don't agree with his views on Nato, I do think it is unfair for Sir Keir to castigate him for something which he has clearly not said.
Sir Keir said this about Mr Corbyn's position -
'"I've also made it clear that our position in the Labour Party is not to accept the false equivalence between Russian aggression and the acts of Nato."
Which is all very well, but that's not what Mr Corbyn said.
He said, quote -
""I don't blame Nato for the fact that Russia has invaded Ukraine. What I say is look at the thing historically, and look at the process that could happen at the end of the Ukraine war."
That's pretty clear as I read it - Mr Corbyn is categorically not blaming Nato for the situation in Ukraine, and furthermore, he is advocating the potential disbanding of Nato to be discussed when the Ukrainian conflict is concluded, whenever that may be.
Therefore, although I normally scoff along with majority at Mr Corbyn's frankly barmy assessments of what is going on in the world, on this occasion, although I don't agree with his views on Nato, I do think it is unfair for Sir Keir to castigate him for something which he has clearly not said.
TTT - // I'm really not interested in the internal squabbles of labour. It's just him thinking NATO should be disbanded that beggars belief. //
Mr Corbyn is simply raising a valid point and offering it for discussion.
I don't personally agree with his assessment, but that still does not mean that I am in favour of him being castigated in public for something he has not said.
I think that is more important than an 'internal squabble'.
Mr Corbyn is simply raising a valid point and offering it for discussion.
I don't personally agree with his assessment, but that still does not mean that I am in favour of him being castigated in public for something he has not said.
I think that is more important than an 'internal squabble'.
TTT - // he did actually say NATO should be disbanded right? //
Wrong.
He said we should look at Nato when the Ukraine conflict is finished, and assess it in terms of its history, and look at its validity, and the notion that its existence may itself actually instigate and escalate conflict.
That's not saying Nato should be disbanded, merely that it should be thought about and discussed in terms of its future role, if indeed it has one.
Wrong.
He said we should look at Nato when the Ukraine conflict is finished, and assess it in terms of its history, and look at its validity, and the notion that its existence may itself actually instigate and escalate conflict.
That's not saying Nato should be disbanded, merely that it should be thought about and discussed in terms of its future role, if indeed it has one.
// can you just imagine what Mad Vlad would be doing if NATO didn't exist? //
Invading Ukraine.
I am not agreeing with Corbyn, but you need to think your argument through a little. NATOs existence did not deter Putin in the slightest from invading. And NATO have been impotent bystanders while Ukraine is being bombed to bits.
Ukraine have been trying to join NATO and the EU for over a decade, and they were rebuffed because we were scared of Putin. It is clear that NATO is a bit pointless if NATOs leaders have no balls.
Invading Ukraine.
I am not agreeing with Corbyn, but you need to think your argument through a little. NATOs existence did not deter Putin in the slightest from invading. And NATO have been impotent bystanders while Ukraine is being bombed to bits.
Ukraine have been trying to join NATO and the EU for over a decade, and they were rebuffed because we were scared of Putin. It is clear that NATO is a bit pointless if NATOs leaders have no balls.
As I have said before, personally I think its time (well after this os over) for both the UN and NATO to be disbanded in favour of smoething better. Something with more teeth that countries properly subscribe to - paying their way and not letting others just do it.
It's been shown very clearly that its Poland and the East European countries along with US and UK that are the fore runners. Germany well .....
It's been shown very clearly that its Poland and the East European countries along with US and UK that are the fore runners. Germany well .....
“NATOs existence did not deter Putin in the slightest from invading”
Er, that’s because Ukraine isn’t in NATO!
And furthermore when Putin first invaded Ukraine in 2014 there wasn’t a single tank in the NATO forward area. Not one.
It never ceases to amaze how many would slit their own throats rather than stand up for an alliance dedicated to protecting us from … what? I can’t imagine ;-)
Corbyn’s are weasel words. Meaningless nonsense. Peace is more than just the absence of war. If you don’t understand that you can never be a serious leader.
As someone else said recently: if you ever wondered what you’d have done to stop Hitler, well, you’re doing it now
Says it all.
Er, that’s because Ukraine isn’t in NATO!
And furthermore when Putin first invaded Ukraine in 2014 there wasn’t a single tank in the NATO forward area. Not one.
It never ceases to amaze how many would slit their own throats rather than stand up for an alliance dedicated to protecting us from … what? I can’t imagine ;-)
Corbyn’s are weasel words. Meaningless nonsense. Peace is more than just the absence of war. If you don’t understand that you can never be a serious leader.
As someone else said recently: if you ever wondered what you’d have done to stop Hitler, well, you’re doing it now
Says it all.
//Mr Corbyn is simply raising a valid point and offering it for discussion. //
Nonsense. He's been banging on about disbanding NATO for years.
https:/
Nonsense. He's been banging on about disbanding NATO for years.
https:/
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.