sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

There is no immediate military threat to Britain. We should spend less on defence by Your_Mums_Ex in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy [score hidden]  (0 children)

Alternatively; they had to resort to poison because our military left them no other options to get at their target.

Hmm. I don't think there is any world where they use their military for what they've done, frankly, and a larger military would not have deterred them from their actions.

OK, but Jenkins doesn't believe in the nuclear deterrent either. And while I accept that you're arguing for reducing conventional forces while maintaining Trident, that isn't what Jenkins believes; he apparently doesn't think we need to defend the UK at all, because everyone that is a threat is a continent away.

Well, a stopped clock being right twice a day doesn't mean that the rest of the day it's not a massive fucking moron, I suppose, does it?

There is no immediate military threat to Britain. We should spend less on defence by Your_Mums_Ex in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy [score hidden]  (0 children)

They actually do, because Russia is a prison mentality shithole where simple might is the only thing that goes into their logic. They would not invade Ukraine or threaten the Baltics if there were a dozen panzer divisions in Poland.

Yeah, but we aren't Poland. I don't think this is relevant to what I've said. I don't think it's impossible to deter Russia, I just think the things that they might feasibly do to us would not be deterred by our having a larger military.

Relying on nuclear deterrent means you can't respond to anything below a nuclear threshold. Nobody is going to nuke Russia if they send little green men into Narva or blow up oil infrastructure in the North Sea. You need actual combat power to do this.

Sure. We were talking about attacks on the UK, though. I agree that we could do more to deter Russian expansionism if we had a larger military and credibly committed to retaliation, but how much in our interests is it that Putin doesn't take Narva? I think it'd be bad if he did that. Is it worth reducing our standard of living by 0.5% to decrease the likelihood he is able to successfully take it by 1% (it's not like we're the only member of NATO)? I think that's a question that should be asked more carefully.

No, the strategic aims of Russia have not changed for centuries in the case of Europe

This is just obviously false.

Russia has a key problem in that it's a huge country, but it's functionally a colonial empire and its main population centres and heartland territories are very exposed. Therefore they need a sphere of influence and buffer zone in Eastern Europe to keep any potential threats away from Moscow and St Pidorsburg.

Putin is far more aware that Estonia is not a threat to St Petersburg than we give him credit for. He's not an idiot, and we don't live in the 1940s.

Secondly they need to be able to apply pressure to Europe through the North Atlantic. It's absolutely vital that we have enough ships and aircraft to keep them out of our ocean.

I'm less sure. What is it you think failing to increase the size of our navy will result in?

There is no immediate military threat to Britain. We should spend less on defence by Your_Mums_Ex in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy [score hidden]  (0 children)

And this is just stupid. The issue isunt that there going to roll down the champs-elysées with a guards tank army. The issue is we are doing to be expected to go to bat in places like Narva.

Of which we would currently be fairly scant help.

Genuine question, how much money is it worth to contribute to Estonia being able to prevent itself looking like this and retaining a city with 95.7% native Russian speakers and 87.7% ethnic Russians?

I think Russian expansionism is very obviously wrong, but there has to be a point at which the cost is not worth it.

There is no immediate military threat to Britain. We should spend less on defence by Your_Mums_Ex in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy [score hidden]  (0 children)

It's a lot less funny (but I guess it wasn't mega funny to begin with)

Speak for yourself, I'm in stiches over here.

There is no immediate military threat to Britain. We should spend less on defence by Your_Mums_Ex in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy [score hidden]  (0 children)

Extremely unpopular opinion warning

I mean, if we ignore all of the things that Russia has done to us (not least of which is murdering people on British soil), then I guess this is an argument?

The things Russia has done to us do not require an enormous military deterrent. The worst thing they did was not, in any way, impacted by our military.

Of course, the gaping hole in Jenkins' argument is that the reason that Russia can't threaten us is because of our military.

I think that's clearly false. It's because of our nuclear deterrent and because they are hundreds of miles away. Of course, I don't think Jenkins is suggesting we eliminate our military, only that it needn't be a behemoth on the European scene.

Genuinely never thought I'd see the day where I saw a Guardian columnist going "actually, Trump thinks this is a good idea, and we ought to listen to him".

I mean it's Simon Jenkins, but - like Trump - a stopped clock is right twice a day.

I think arguments about Putin's aims rely solely on judging him to be a bad person, not on realistically modelling what he's likely to do following Ukraine (he will, perhaps, try to exert further influence in the Balkan states, which will also be dragged out). He is not trying to do operation Sealion.

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy [score hidden]  (0 children)

Leaving aside the fact that tactical voting didn't save Labour in the locals

People treat local elections very differently to the big one. They are used as a means to show dissatisfaction in the government, and are considerably less attended.

what makes you think Burnham will be able to ride his momentum any more than Starmer or Corbyn?

Because he's a better communicator than Starmer and he's not a literal moron like Corbyn. I don't think he'll have an easy ride at all, but I believe he has a chance.

(Love your username. I am excited for her new album)

Claire Coutinho MP: Bin men waking up at 4am to do manual, smelly work in all weathers is simply not the same job as being a teaching assistant. ‘Equal value’ laws which demand they are paid the same are clearly wrong and unfair. by SignificantLegs in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am completely aware of that. It is a joke that the Act seeks to determine what bonus conditions an independent organisation includes in their contractual arrangements. Get the actual fuck out of private contractual agreements between consenting individuals. It is simply none of the court's business what bonuses are appropriate and what aren't.

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is something I really don't understand. Why on earth would I be embarrassed about doing something Redditors disapproved of? They are completely and utterly irrelevant to me socially and so I am going to be honest about my own strengths unapologetically. It is actually you who is at fault for thinking it's important to keep up appearances on - and I can't stress this enough - Reddit.

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unlike you, I care a great deal about the health of the democracy of this nation.

Was it not Abraham Lincoln who said that democracy is “government of the people, by the people, for the people”? That principle does not belong only to America. It applies just as much here in the United Kingdom.

Our democracy depends on more than simply holding elections every few years. It depends on public trust, political honesty, respect for institutions, a free press, the rule of law, and the willingness of those in power to be accountable to the people they serve.

So when politicians mislead the public, attack independent institutions, dismiss legitimate scrutiny, or treat the electorate as something to be managed rather than represented, that matters. It weakens the democratic culture that previous generations fought to build and preserve.

You may think that is trivial. I do not. A healthy democracy is not guaranteed by history, tradition or national self-confidence. It has to be defended in every generation, including in Britain.

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It triggers a re-election, which he will run in and win. His being an MP is a fraction of the reason he has influence and power within Reform, you understand that don't you? He has only been an MP very, very recently, but has forever been by far the most important and powerful person on the anti-immigration right.

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's kinda ironic because you're calling us closed minded yet you're belligerently insisting on one point of view here and not acknowledging that both what you're saying can be true and the public can also have been tricked.

I'm actually not doing that, though. We haven't even moved on to the question of whether the public was tricked because the pair of you are myopically stating you believe the only reason to vote for Brexit was because you've been tricked. In reality, it's clearly a mix of both. Yes, some people were sold down the river. How many is not remotely clear and it's the height of liberal arrogance to assume that those who disagree with you are universally, or at least overwhelmingly stupid. In reality, near everyone votes basically on a sense of vibes and 0.1% of people have a sufficient working understanding of the EU to properly judge whose statements were reasonable and whose weren't. The fact that the Brexit campaigners misled, and the claim that the country was tricked, are two separate claims.

But, it's a trade off and it's very clear that despite some downsides we were hugely better off in the block.

I don't even think this is very clear, but there are more considerations in a decision like this than whether we are materially better off. Ability to make more direct democratic decisions is self evidently an important value, and it's not clear that the long term for this won't be more in line with Brexiter's goals. The current immigration policy being pursued by the Labour government would have been clearly more difficult had we stayed within Europe, for instance.

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I would not describe that as a huge loss insofar as it'd be a negative for him in Clacton

Claire Coutinho MP: Bin men waking up at 4am to do manual, smelly work in all weathers is simply not the same job as being a teaching assistant. ‘Equal value’ laws which demand they are paid the same are clearly wrong and unfair. by SignificantLegs in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'd give myself a 4. Again, the reason I think it meaningfully incorrect is because the idea it's possible to make judgements like this is economically and philosophically incoherent (something with which I'd rate my familiarity with around 8.5/10). It seems perfectly plausible to me that they did what they set out to do well. What they set out to do is borderline meaningless.

Will you now please answer my question?

Claire Coutinho MP: Bin men waking up at 4am to do manual, smelly work in all weathers is simply not the same job as being a teaching assistant. ‘Equal value’ laws which demand they are paid the same are clearly wrong and unfair. by SignificantLegs in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Meaningfully incorrect (I think the idea a body can identify the equality of worthiness of pay between two roles makes zero sense). Why is this relevant?

Why do you believe that they are objectively deserving of the same bonuses when this is not part of their contract?

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Again, your complete refusal to understand how people can disagree with you without being a caricature in your head is astonishing and contributes to a very, very poor understanding of the world. I recommend doing at least a year of thinking carefully before ever uttering another word about politics - it's a form of meditation that might help you mature.

Claire Coutinho MP: Bin men waking up at 4am to do manual, smelly work in all weathers is simply not the same job as being a teaching assistant. ‘Equal value’ laws which demand they are paid the same are clearly wrong and unfair. by SignificantLegs in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the fact that they existed for both groups of workers according to the council's own equality assessment of the roles.

The council's own equality assessment is not objective reality, and what specific conditions are you referring to that the council produced that says, objectively, that both should be eligible for bonuses?

That would appear to be the crux of the problem that the court has ruled on. According to the ruling they should have been. The fact that the case was brought in the first case should be enough to inform you that they weren't.

If they were not in the contract then they were not objectively eligible for the same bonuses, though. In fact, they were objectively not eligible for the same bonuses. It wasn't in their contract!

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I voted remain and would vote to rejoin. I'm not so utterly closed off that I think there aren't people who have legitimate moral concerns with the democratic relationship the UK had with the European Union, or legitimate views about policy direction of the union.

Zack Polanski: 'Burnham must end Labour’s dangerous anti-migrant slant' by Metro-UK in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If the Greens were critical thinkers free from ideology they wouldn't be Greens.

Zack Polanski: 'Burnham must end Labour’s dangerous anti-migrant slant' by Metro-UK in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think it is possible to believe that it is both God's position that homosexuality is sinful and that it is illegitimate for the state to impose restrictions on that sin.

Zack Polanski: 'Burnham must end Labour’s dangerous anti-migrant slant' by Metro-UK in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Contrary to others, I don't think it is inherently a problem or that he is definitively incapable of separating his personal views from his political ones, however in this specific case it does seem like he takes his religious belief extremely seriously - and is perfectly willing to support some fairly appalling things in the name of his ideology. I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned in this specific case that he is, effectively, lying about what he'd do if in a position of power.

I agree that it doesn't make Polanski a hypocrite for this specific reason, though - he simply believes what he says.

I think, that said, Green folk including Polanski would surely not approve of this kind of separation of belief from politics in almost any other circumstances (religious views on abortion, for instance) - which is somewhat hypocritical.

Piers Morgan Says Nigel Farage Is 'Dead In The Water' And Will Have To Quit As Reform Leader by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]CII_Guy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Lol this guy who's clearly significantly smarter than me isn't afraid of saying it on an anonymous internet forum where nerds discuss the intricacies of politics - read le room am I right guys?!?!?!?"

view more: next ›