Utter utter nonsense, the idea that there is some fixed point of discourse out of a near infinite set of coordinates that JC has to choose from and if he did not find the exact correct point loads of his most hard core support would have deserted him.

What trash.

The whole point about Corbyn is that whether you agree or disagree with him he's being saying exactly the same thing all his adult life and therefore isn't going to bull**** you the way every other careerist politician does.

If that were proven to be false then people would abandon him. Very fast.

That's not really true though. When Neil brought up comments he'd made about Nato a mere 4 years ago he definitely didn't want to repeat them.

That is his privilege. If he had lied about what he had said that would be different.

NATO is irrelevant in any case, Trump doesn't believe in it and it benefitted no one but the yanks anyway.

Anyone fancy commenting on anyone else.
This isn't just a bash/defend Corbyn thread.
How's May doing in your opinions?


Cue - she's not doing very well but corbyn.....

Rabbit in the headlights, probably autistic. Not actually evil but severe difficulties with empathy.

No, he doesn't have the courage of his convictions to repeat them now that he's the leader of the party in campaign mode. That doesn't make him different from most politicians in that regard but let's not create a myth about him when it's blatantly untrue.

I was speaking with regard to the discussion on whether he should have referenced UK support for American bombing campaigns etc as laying a fertile ground for terrorism. The exact wording is neither here nor there. Many are saying he should have avoided this link, in order not to alienate potential voters. My view is that it's not a vote loser to take this line, but for those who believe it is, they should also consider the effect on the activist base and hence the impact on getting people to vote Labour. They are fighting a good campaign because they have a much bigger activist base. If Labour start to concede ground on the very issues that prompted people to become politically active in the first place they will find support will wane very quickly.

Just an opinion.

OAFK is still seething about Corbyn's speech going down well.
Lashing out blindly now.

The purpose of NATO is to conduct war, it's hardly controversial to argue it is a danger to world peace. But Corbyn isn't stupid, the rat Neil wants a headline and Corbyn wasn't prepared to hand it to him. Paying due regard to context doesn't equate to political opportunism - especially when relating to the media.

That is not the purpose of NATO.

So, despite the waffle, you agree with my post.

please explain then.

The onus is totally on you, but if you take them at their word 'freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law'.

It seems to be mainly about protecting american control over trade.

We should not have any formal military association with the Americans. They keep electing visibly crazy and stupid individuals with poor judgement controlled by religous wackos and corporations.

nato the only thing preventing putin from swallowing half of eastern europe. i'm glad we're doing our bit

I think a history lesson is due, probably starting from pre-Nato days in 1945.

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

Very good.

I think Afghani people would agree.

Corbyn spoke 4 years ago when NATO was still bombing the s*** out of Afghan villages.

https://www.information.dk/udland/20...han-insurgents

Show em the meaning of democracy and human rights.

Yeah, nobody here is defending every (or even any specific) NATO operation. But to say the purpose of it is to wage war is beyond stupid. Whatever the alliance's faults, it's purpose is the opposite.

Like I said, war is peace.

Why do Labour allow Diane Abbot anywhere near tv politics shows? They should put her in lockdown in a similar way to what he Tories have done with Boris Johnson. They've brought up her old opinions cheerleading for the IRA and she still can't bring herself to say she thinks those comments are wrong now. Just say it ffs. Looks incredibly bad for someone who wants to be Home Secretary to be unable to take that step. And it's even worse if she doesn't believe the comments were wrong.