A Political Thread

[ncurd]

I think its very naive to think that middle east policy is only reason for these attacks, attacks have happened in countrues which have no take part. It's a excuse used to fuel the flames it may reduce the amount of radicalised indivduals but I don't think it will stop attacks and not really effect the frequency.

Its also worrying that May (whilst supposedly national campaigning was suspended) is using this as excuse to curb internet freedoms on everyone when there is zero evidence it would make a bloody difference.

This is incredibly complex problem that has tons of mitigating factors and can't be solved with a soundbite from Internment (because that worked brilliantly in Ireland) to carrying on as we are and eventually prevailing. They key factor is we need to engage with communities and work them far better than we are currently.

I don't think any party (major or minor) has the single one answer required and we need to stop appealing to the electorate and what plays well to them for the answers.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Foreign policy is the single biggest reason by a country mile for Islamic extremist attacks.
Change the foreign policy, sharply, and take Britain out of the scope sights of the twisted creatures that grow out of the chaos left behind.
Shouldn't our govt be about serve and protect the folk that vote them in?
Why can't our govt embrace the task of battling rough sleepers with the same level of falling over themselves excitement the way they get all giddy and start rubbing themselves on the American presidents leg whenever the yanks come over and want some mates to help them launch another illegal sortie into yet another country.
Why can't our govt show the kind of unbridled aggression toward homelessness and food banks they showed towards Gaddafi?
Why can't our govt show the kind of military zeal they have in the destruction of other countries infrastructure toward building new homes so that young British people have a genuine chance of getting on the property ladder?
Isn't it time for a change of policy?

Teresa May has a non manifesto. Nothing, nothing is costed. She has no idea of how to combat Islamic terrorism. She has already delivered 20,000 less Police. She has already failed to keep migration under 270,000 per year. She is the Queen of the U turn. She made the claim that all corporations will pay their fair share of tax and yet not one scarce piece of legislation has come forth to ensure that happens. Point of fact, she goes home to a husband who is a hedge fund manager for Capital Group, with a portfolio of at least £1.4 trillion pounds and guess who some of the clients are?
Starbucks and Amazon.
Who pay no tax at all here in the UK.
I can't see Mrs May's ideas going down very well at the dinner table.
The dementia tax, designed to steal sick old peoples homes from them is repugnant.
The winter fuel allowance, callously taken away from old people.
6 years of austerity and the deficit is bigger than when the Tories started their tenure.
The Tories dropped the tax rate for the richest people in the country from 50% to 40%; is that why the deficit got bigger?
David Cameron the Brexit biscuit boy offering a referendum on the EU and then fighting to get people to vote Remain.
Libya.
Manchester.
Borough market. (Its not safe to pick up my beloved Eccles Cakes anymore)

To coin her phrase, 'enough is enough'.

I've made my mind up, on Thursday I will be voting for my local Labour Candidate, Rupa Huq.
We desperately need some compassion in our govt, and some serious injection into the public services. We desperately need more Police, more Doctors, nurses, teachers...
We need less food banks and homeless people.
We need to return the incentive to Solar power development and purchasing that the Tories took away as soon as they got in.

I'm voting Labour this time.
Warts and all.
(The Chief wart being Diane Abbot)

 

[General Melchett]

Hearing May say 'enough is enough' was stomach churning given that the police cuts etc. happened on her watch as Home Secretary and PM.

I hope it's a hung parliament with Labour forming a coalition with the Lib Dems & SNP. Would be absolutely hilarious given the lead May had in the polls when she called the election and based on the fact that she chose to make it about her v Corbyn.

I suspect that the Tories will increase their majority by a few seats which means that they have just wasted everyone's time and so much money with this snap election.

 

[ncurd]

The fact Diane Abbott has been benched on media interviews gives me hopes she'll be benched in government.

 

[The Jones Boy]

The fact Diane Abbott has been benched on media interviews gives me hopes she'll be benched in government.

There remains the possibility that some of the capable members of the Blairite brigade will warm up to a cabinet position if the impossible occurred and Labour got a look in.
Ms Abbott could find herself another reality tv show to immerse herself in.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Foreign policy - change it and we're all safe and all these extremists will no longer have an excuse to carry out their lunacy. Pull the other one. How about how certain Muslims just do not feel integrated within British/western society and just feel downright alienated?

 

[The Jones Boy]

I'm sure that some of them do fell alienated, but there's a a lot more Christians and atheists and homeless people of British origin that feel that way under an austerity plan that results in a bigger deficit.

I tell you what Blindside, lets just keep on bombing those nasty little people with fabric around their heads in far away places and see how that works out for the safety of the greater British public back here in the UK.

At some point you have to ask "What do we really get out of an aggressive military stance throughout the middle east?
What do 'we' get out of it?
Amber Rudd would say we get job security for those working in the arms industry here in the UK, and the shareholders of those comapnies do well out of it.

What about the other 99.9% of us?
What do we get out of a consistently aggressive middle eastern foreign policy?
Other than more atrocities.

 

[Which Tyler]

Foreign policy - change it and we're all safe and all these extremists will no longer have an excuse to carry out their lunacy. Pull the other one. How about how certain Muslims just do not feel integrated within British/western society and just feel downright alienated?

Have you found anyone who thinks that?

Does anyone here think it's apure coincidence that Brexit, and it's debates, have given us a sharp spike in racial/religious tensions in the UK, a marked increase in disaffection, and a marked increase in attacks (and foiled attempts) that come out of this?

 

[Bada-Bing!]

I'm sure that some of them do fell alienated, but there's a a lot more Christians and atheists and homeless people of British origin that feel that way under an austerity plan that results in a bigger deficit.

Yes, sure they do, but they don't start running people down, stabbing people or blowing themselves up.

I tell you what Blindside, lets just keep on bombing those nasty little people with fabric around their heads in far away places and see how that works out for the safety of the greater British public back here in the UK.

At some point you have to ask "What do we really get out of an aggressive military stance throughout the middle east?
What do 'we' get out of it?
Amber Rudd would say we get job security for those working in the arms industry here in the UK, and the shareholders of those comapnies do well out of it.

What about the other 99.9% of us?
What do we get out of a consistently aggressive middle eastern foreign policy?
Other than more atrocities.

I am saying it is just part of the excuse for doing what they do. These so called "Muslims" who don't feel a part of British/western life culture will still feel alienated even if Foreign policy is magically reversed. There is a big "victim mentality" amongst Muslims which sits easily with them and needs to be challenged.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Have you found anyone who thinks that?

Does anyone here think it's apure coincidence that Brexit, and it's debates, have given us a sharp spike in racial/religious tensions in the UK, a marked increase in disaffection, and a marked increase in attacks (and foiled attempts) that come out of this?

Don't think it is pure coincidence BUT France, Germany and Belguim have had an increase in attacks without the Brexit thing happening.



A bit of a tangent.
Personally i hate how people are defining themselves by a religion, end of the day Religion IS a choice in my eyes. It's crazy but it seems to be becoming more and more common thing now days despite the advances in technology.
I mean there are White Christians in america who got salty over the Far cry 5 game having a christian cult as the main baddies like FFS.

 

[McTallshort]

It's never been appropriate, but then neither has crushing civilian populations, or illegally invading and continuing to occupy foreign countries while you loot their mineral wealth and supply their neighbours with the latest in military hardware.
We have not seen the last of this type of low tech attack by extremists and Teresa May is not interested in solving the issue, she will only continue to try to affect the symptoms that come from our aggressive heartless foreign policy.
Teresa May cannot protect us.

And the Saudis and Iranians have nothing to do with this? The Saudis spent I believe 80 billion last year on pushing its extreme form of Sunni Islam. Iran were supporting the Shia insurrection into Southern Irag to such an extent that British Troops fighting that insurrection were actually engaged with Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

Yes the west was wrong to invade Iraq but Iran/Saudi Arabia/Russia are all playing a much bigger game and its one based on Ideology. Its all very comforting thinking this is all our fault and we just need to sit down and change a few things and all will be right in the world but the fact is their are nasty people who attract themselves to all kinds of extremism and this spate of attacking in Western Europe is more down to the people committing them than any outside influences.

The middle east is becoming a far more conservative/intolerant place with religious lines being drawn and more extreme opinions and religious intolerance becoming the norm. This is also true in the UK dress codes among British born Muslims are becoming more conservative and people becoming more "devout". This has more to do with what is being taught in Mosques than any heartless foreign policy.

Look please dont bother writing one of your 500 word relies we are not going to agree with each other lets just leave it at that.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Yes the west was wrong to invade Iraq...

On that much we can agree. But why stop there, instead of splintering off and looking at symptoms that have grown up because of the Gulf war.

Now the west is wrong (more accurately America) because they are financing the weaponry for Israel to the tune of 4.75 billion per year and they provide $0.25 of a billion in cash for the Israeli army, but hedging their bets they also pay 1.5 billion to the Egyptian army, oh sorry, they pay 'Aid', to keep Egypt 'happy', and to keep a coup in place with no democracy and no constitution.
America has been financing Egypt since Sadat was in power decades ago.
Extremism is always on the fringes.

America finances the oppression of the muslim states and wonders why they had a spring uprising and now the muslim states have become more hard line ever since.
These people have had enough of American control of their countries through puppet govt's and puppet military juntas.

In 2006, U.S. direct investment in Algeria totalled $5.3 billion, mostly in the petroleum sector, which U.S. companies dominate. American companies also are active in the banking and finance, services, pharmaceuticals, medical facilities, telecommunications, aviation, seawater desalination, energy production, and information technology sectors. Basically folks, everything. Algeria is the United States' 3rd-largest market in the Middle East/North African region. U.S. exports to Algeria totaled $1.2 billion in 2005, an increase of more than 50% since 2003.
Algeria
Military & Police Aid $2,400,000 (2017)
Humanitarian & Development Aid $4,505,000 (2014) bit smaller than the next one...
Arms Sales $72,625,633 (2014)

One of the biggest surprises was a $142 million allocation for Tunisia, which has struggled to live up to its promise as the Arab Spring's sole success story. The US Senate had resisted signing off on the State Department's $134 million request, but in the end appropriators ended up giving the terrorism-plagued nation the full amount and then some.

Jordan also fared remarkably well, with a $1.275 billion allotment — 25% more than what the State Department had requested. Egypt, meanwhile, gets mixed results: The bill retains the $1.3 billion in annual military aid but sets new conditions for its release, which the secretary of state may waive for national security reasons.

The United States and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), in particular, granted Morocco $167 million in 2012.

A lot of the grants are not available to be publically viewed, I'm only showing what is easily found by surfing the net. I'm sure you're getting the gist... so...

Why?
Why is America paying off the north african and middle eastern states?
America is controlling the middle east financially and militarily.
Why?
Oil and war?
They are the obvious answers.
Geo-political hegemony?
Maybe.
Bottom line is, they are doing it and it ****** off a lot of the natives, really upsets them.
People don't generally like being oppressed, they don't like glass ceilings.
It causes civil unrest, resentment grows from inequality etc it becomes a growth opportunity for revenge ideologies.
America has been making the ground fertile for rebellion and martyrdom from these indigenous populations for a long time.
When a dictator is removed, the vacuum offers the opportunity for those already disaffected to stake their claim.
Enter extremism.

Of course Iran is involved, they are trying carefully to keep the Syrian buffer zone and drive the Americans out of Iraq and the Persian Gulf (Cant see that happening anytime soon.)
Have a look at the ledger and see how many countries Iran has attacked in the last 100 years.
Compare it to America.
Moving on...
Guess who is Americas little war *****?
That would be... the UK.
Maggie and Ronnie
Blair and Bush
Cameron and Hilary (Libya)

This is boring basic stuff, but it shows what can be found if you just follow the money.

 

[McTallshort]

But didn't the US increase its National debt by a third trying to stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan? Doesnt make much financial sense to me.

 

[The Jones Boy]

The financial advantage of the Iraq war has only been to the weapons and munitions manufacturers and to Halliburton and it's subsidiary 'Kellogg, Brown and Root' (Dick Cheney's old company, they hogged the rebuilding contracts.)
The actual cost for the whole nightmare has been a monumental financial burden foisted on the people of America by Bush jnr and his puppet masters Cheney and Rumsfeld) who have shelled out 2 trillion dollars and counting, and thats just for the Iraq war as far as I can tell.
To be fair to the yanks, they have made more effort in stabilising Afghanistan but that place has been largely unconquerable for 2400 years (since Alexander of Macedon was up there battling with the locals) however in Iraq they havent tried very hard and thats why IS have been able to take hold and hang on.

 

[McTallshort]

The financial advantage of the Iraq war has only been to the weapons and munitions manufacturers and to Halliburton and it's subsidiary 'Kellogg, Brown and Root' (Dick Cheney's old company, they hogged the rebuilding contracts.)
The actual cost for the whole nightmare has been a monumental financial burden foisted on the people of America by Bush jnr and his puppet masters Cheney and Rumsfeld) who have shelled out 2 trillion dollars and counting, and thats just for the Iraq war as far as I can tell.
To be fair to the yanks, they have made more effort in stabilising Afghanistan but that place has been largely unconquerable for 2400 years (since Alexander of Macedon was up there battling with the locals) however in Iraq they havent tried very hard and thats why IS have been able to take hold and hang on.

Well ISIS are kind of finished in Iraq now and have been retreating for sometime the US brought in the same General who had stabilized Afghanistan (which was utterly conquered by the Mongols in 1200's)

But again you say follow the money but the middle east is a black hole for US money.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Corbyn finally goes on the attack.
Not before time.
He is stating that Teresa May has failed the people of Britain by dismissing 20,000 police officers in the UK during her time as Home Secretary.
He has called for her to step down due to her abject failure to protect UK citizens.
He is highlighting yet another U turn as the Conservatives want to have a complete removal of the winter fuel tax allowance for pensioners. Now the Conservatives are talking about possibly means testing the elderly...
4000 more pensioner deaths are predicted if the winter fuel allowance is trashed by the Conservatives.
Then their is the repugnant 'Dementia tax.

It still seems likely that the Tories will get in with a handy majority and we have to ask ourselves, why would we want to bring this amount of pain and hardship to add to the 6 years we have just had.
The deficit is bigger
NHS waiting times are bigger
Emergency Ambulance arrival times are bigger
The terrorist problems are bigger

Teresa May can only make cuts, she has no concept of how to build anything except a bigger division between the top richest 2% in this country and... the rest of us.

 

[Which Tyler]

Just copy/pasting this across from another board's politics thread, where the current argument is whether Western foreign policy has any effect on terrorist at all; no effect whatsoever; or is part of a nuanced picture that's different for each individual scumbag.

On an ISIS level - they directly claim that Western policy in the Middle East IS a reason (#4 IIRC) for their resistance.
On a personal level, I'd be amazed if absolutely none of these radicals were slightly upset to hear that members of their family had been killed directly, or indirectly, by Western interference (Yes, they still have cousins / siblings / grandparents etc who haven't come to Britain, or who came, but returned).

To claim that foriegn policy has no effect is to ignore everything we know about human nature, and direct statements from ISIS and their likes.
Just as bad is to claim that it's the sole reason (fortunately, absolutely no-one HAS claimed that one).

Other reasons are our liberal attitudes (immorality), our democracy/freedom and our not being Muslim (and specificaly whichever specific minority sect of Islam that individual identifies as).

So if we take those as the 4 principal points of reasoning; what can we do anything about? Can/should we stop treating women, the LGBT community and science with any for of respect? Can/should we abandon democracy and declare ourselves an authoritarian theocracy? Can/should we all convert not only to Islam, but ALSO to Whabism, (and end up in a continual internecine war based on being the wrong sect of Wahibism)? Can/should we adjust our foriegn policy and maybe stop seeing them as inconenient irrelevances sitting on a bunch of natural resources that should be ours?

If they want to come at us for the rest, then **** 'em. If they come at us for bombing the **** out of their relatives because we wanted their oil (and security and building contracts) then... they've kinda got a point; and we should stop doing that.
It may only reduce these attacks by 10%, or it might be 50% - who knows, each individual will has his own reasons that finally flips them from devout to radical, and from radical to suicide-terrorist.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Well ISIS are kind of finished in Iraq now and have been retreating for sometime the US brought in the same General who had stabilized Afghanistan

Don't count out the Kurds, they have been battling like Lions to keep IS away from their designated homeland. The Kurds have been getting some help from Germany and other countries. For a long time the Kurds were leading the line against IS,

But again you say follow the money but the middle east is a black hole for US money.

Once again I agree with you, it is a black hole, but only for the public money generated by US citizens taxes. That money is shelled out to bring 'stability' to the area.
Essentially it's a bribe to keep the status quo intact. It allows the USA to keep their geo-political hegemony intact.
The profits generated from the oil coming back to Houston and weapons manufacturers who have contracts with the Pentagon is still going into the coffers of the wealthiest members of that society.
It is not being offset against the buirden of payments.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Just copy/pasting this across from another board's politics thread, where the current argument is whether Western foreign policy has any effect on terrorist at all; no effect whatsoever; or is part of a nuanced picture that's different for each individual scumbag.

The constant oppression of western military power over the Muslim states creates an environment that allows the extremists to propogate their ideas and it provides sympathetic ears.
The foreign policy is the backdrop that enables the growth of extremism.

It's not very long ago that the Irish bombing campaign was considered too hard to resolve because 2nd and 3rd generation Irish families here in England were giving the IRA a camouflage to work from.
It's almost impossible to wheedle out the insurgents in that environment, so what happened?
The foreign policy toward Ireland went through a sea change and adopted a more conciliatory approach to how to deal with the Irish.
Then slowly ... but surely... the bombings stopped.

We know that there are 2nd and 3rd generation Muslims , born and bred British citizens living here in the UK who are not terrorists, but they are sympathetic to the bombers because they all have family back in the middle east who have suffered or are still suffering occupation and oppression from the west and the partners of the west.
This ugly low tech terrorism attacks on the people of western europe in particular the members of NATO in that group, will not stop until they change their foreign policy and start to treat sovereign countries as such rather than dominating them militarily and oppressing their people through 'Aid' used to prop up tyrants, dictators, military juntas and rigged elections.

 

[McTallshort]

The constant oppression of western military power over the Muslim states creates an environment that allows the extremists to propogate their ideas and it provides sympathetic ears.
The foreign policy is the backdrop that enables the growth of extremism.

It's not very long ago that the Irish bombing campaign was considered too hard to resolve because 2nd and 3rd generation Irish families here in England were giving the IRA a camouflage to work from.
It's almost impossible to wheedle out the insurgents in that environment, so what happened?
The foreign policy toward Ireland went through a sea change and adopted a more conciliatory approach to how to deal with the Irish.
Then slowly ... but surely... the bombings stopped.

We know that there are 2nd and 3rd generation Muslims , born and bred British citizens living here in the UK who are not terrorists, but they are sympathetic to the bombers because they all have family back in the middle east who have suffered or are still suffering occupation and oppression from the west and the partners of the west.
This ugly low tech terrorism attacks on the people of western europe in particular the members of NATO in that group, will not stop until they change their foreign policy and start to treat sovereign countries as such rather than dominating them militarily and oppressing their people through 'Aid' used to prop up tyrants, dictators, military juntas and rigged elections.

OK just to point out. The IRA campaign ended because the PIRA was infiltrated by MI5, had a high level super Grass in its ranks and most of its most best operators were in Prison and the only way it could progress the Republican cause was through a power share with the Unionists. This didn't stop its criminal activities such as drug dealing or the murders of people in their community but as a terrorist organisation it was finished. The British Government had tried covertly to broker a piece in the 70's but PIRA was trying to push for a united Ireland. The end of the Troubles in North Ireland had nothing to do with foreign policy to the Republic of Ireland. They were just as keen to catch members of the Paramilitaries as the UK government were. Also no one found it impossible to weed anyone out, the Security services knew who the members of PIRA were but didnt have the same detention powers (this had been tried in the 70s and proved unpopular with the UK population.

Also 90% of 2nd or 3rd generation Muslims are not from any middle eastern country under Western Oppression (please name one) they are from Pakistan which is a close Ally of the US and receives very generous aid packages from the West.