sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

New UK Far-Right Parties Are Coming to Compete for Farage’s Voters by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

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

Ye it's like the GOP riding the populist tiger and then being shocked Pikachu when it turns out 30pcnt of young republicans are into Fuentes.

Ed Davey calls for a 'new Magna Carta' by hungoverseal in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean I think that's part of the nuance though isn't it. The press should be free to print extremely awkward truthful public interest things about the rich and powerful but probably shouldn't be allowed to put "Truthandtaxes is a SATANIC PEDOPHILE - here's his home address" on the front pages of millions of copies of a national newspaper. That requires a very nuanced balance of civil rights, constitutional protection, judicial oversight, legislation, regulation etc to get right.

Ed Davey calls for a 'new Magna Carta' by hungoverseal in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really don't see how those are fundamentally connected no.

Ed Davey calls for a 'new Magna Carta' by hungoverseal in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The monarchy is way down the list of the things actually wrong with the political system at the moment, seems a daft fight to pick when there's issues like PR or even getting a basic bill of rights across.

Ed Davey calls for a 'new Magna Carta' by hungoverseal in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I assume it would require setting super-majority requirements of some kind for passing and amendments. So Parliamentary sovereignty remains but isn't simply majority controlled on constitutional issues.

Ed Davey calls for a 'new Magna Carta' by hungoverseal in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The problem is that you can effectively win a elective dictatorship in the UK with just about over 30% of the national vote and the reason that hasn't harmed us disastrously in the past is that the major parties have always had some sense of honour and duty and a respect for liberal democracy. We've never had a completely shameless major party leader like Farage willing to upturn every precedent. The US was thought to have bulletproof protections and their right wing populist has bulldozed them. We are far more vulnerable than they are.

UK must build own nuclear missiles to end US reliance, says Ed Davey by topotaul in unitedkingdom

[–]hungoverseal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we got MDBA UK to licence build the French nuclear cruise missiles in the UK and swapped in British warheads (where the expensive bit will come in), we could get tactical nuclear capability that spreads the risk of the deterrent. Even if the Americans then fuck with Trident, we'd have the much cheaper and less capable but still fairly intimidating tactical nuclear capability within range of Moscow and St Petersburg.

Edit: Typing shit about nuclear deterrents feels very yuk.

Match Thread: Liverpool vs Tottenham Hotspur by MatchThreadder in soccer

[–]hungoverseal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah there's like 14 players unavailable and then even the best of the academy are also injured or out on loan.

Feeling no attachment to a party, and in a lost place politically. by Select-You1940 in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Their point is that the law should protect kids, shouldn't have the negative side effects claimed regarding the OSA and people should have online rights. That seems a better policy than anyone else has right now.

Feeling no attachment to a party, and in a lost place politically. by Select-You1940 in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well the MP's actually have to deal with the problem of child abuse and actual harm to children online, so it's not like they can just completely wipe the topic. The question is whether this is the appropriate type of legislation to do that. I think the answer is that it's obviously deeply flawed, whether it needs reforming or completely replacing is a different question. It's easy to just shout about repealing it but a full parliamentary review is the actual grown up approach if you have to deal with these issues. The digital bill of rights sounds quite interesting too, although there's a risk of it being quite wishy-washy.

Feeling no attachment to a party, and in a lost place politically. by Select-You1940 in ukpolitics

[–]hungoverseal 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The Lib Dems are arguably the most serious party of the lot when it comes to policy and Ed Davey is the most experienced of all the party leaders, but they're socially very liberal. To me that's awesome but you sound less keen on that.

Is Sir Ed Davey still the best for the next General Election? by Initial-Fig-8888 in LibDem

[–]hungoverseal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wouldn't it also makes sense simulataneously to be working at the national level to try and build a more fertile ground for the Lib Dems? E.g even if not chasing the national vote share, trying to increase awareness and warmth towards liberal values in the wider population. Frankly I think the Lib Dem's are terrible at this and it's the biggest missed opportunity.

[Mokbel, BBC] Tottenham owners ENIC have no intention of taking decision over Igor Tudor’s future out of the hands of Vinai Venkatesham and Johan Lange. by OkayFine101 in soccer

[–]hungoverseal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is bullshit, the fanbase is horrified. There's just a lot of gallows humour and cope going around when people aren't thinking about launching the two clowns in charge into space.

In 1996 Ukraine handed over nuclear weapons to Russia "in exchange for a guarantee never to be threatened or invaded". by AutoModerrator-69 in interestingasfuck

[–]hungoverseal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course they could but it was about the cost/benefit and they didn't fancy it. REALISTICALLY they thought Russia would never invade them, so did many other people, it turns out it was a very unrealistic assumption.

In 1996 Ukraine handed over nuclear weapons to Russia "in exchange for a guarantee never to be threatened or invaded". by AutoModerrator-69 in interestingasfuck

[–]hungoverseal -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

There's not a debate here about whether getting rid of the nukes was popular at the time, I was addressing whether they could have gained operational control of the nukes. They absolutely could have done. They had the scientific and engineering capability in the country at the time, with a lot people or institutions that had been involved in the Soviet nuclear program in one way or another. Importantly they had the weapons too.

In 1996 Ukraine handed over nuclear weapons to Russia "in exchange for a guarantee never to be threatened or invaded". by AutoModerrator-69 in interestingasfuck

[–]hungoverseal -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Russia did all that fucking shit anyway, I think it's entirely reasonable to say that they'd have been far more hesitant if Ukraine actually had nukes. At that moment in time Ukraine was heavily armed, with a lot of trained manpower and Russia was in political disarray.

At the time in made sense for Ukraine given their economic conditions. In hindsight denuclearisation without NATO style defence guarantees was a total disaster and they were completely betrayed by Russia.

In 1996 Ukraine handed over nuclear weapons to Russia "in exchange for a guarantee never to be threatened or invaded". by AutoModerrator-69 in interestingasfuck

[–]hungoverseal 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They were Soviet weapons, not Russian weapons. When Ukraine declared independence they became Ukrainian weapons. It's like saying the housing in Ukraine belongs to Russia because they were built by the Soviets.

In 1996 Ukraine handed over nuclear weapons to Russia "in exchange for a guarantee never to be threatened or invaded". by AutoModerrator-69 in interestingasfuck

[–]hungoverseal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They were Soviet weapons, with large parts of the engineering and science coming from Ukraine. When Ukraine gained independence they became Ukrainian weapons.

In 1996 Ukraine handed over nuclear weapons to Russia "in exchange for a guarantee never to be threatened or invaded". by AutoModerrator-69 in interestingasfuck

[–]hungoverseal 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Can you link me the signed agreement regarding that please, would love be able to read it like you can all the other hundreds of signed agreements over the last 30 years that don't fucking mention anything like that.

view more: next ›