orly
Please check with me for Blammo criteria
Not sure that's right at all.
Current Affairs 2017 General Election
- Thread starter neil999
- Start date
- Status
Not sure that's right at all.
Appeasement is all well and good but it supposes that these barbarians only do harm to us on our shores, when in reality they are killing a great many more Muslims in their own neck of the woods. Sitting back and saying it isn't our problem is a bit of a cop out imo, and I'm sure if we were being brutalised by whomever in Britain, I'm sure we would welcome help from abroad rather than them washing their hands of us.
We can argue as to what that help should be, but surely the offering of help is not up for debate?
We can argue as to what that help should be, but surely the offering of help is not up for debate?
zzr45
#MURDERINGSCUM
So IS are a legitimate political organisation we should be negotiating with then?
orly
Please check with me for Blammo criteria
He said
Which we have
You said
Which just isn't right. It's one of a number of contributing factors. No idea how you've made the IS leap there. For example, the US media have this bombing attack as al-Qaeda linked, which predates the emergence of IS.
orly
Please check with me for Blammo criteria
Historically? Yes of course we have Bruce. Empire days and all that.
orchard
Player Valuation: £60m
I think you're a bit confused between what's caused the current situation and strategies to improve the current situation.
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
Interesting to see where Corbyn goes with this...my first thought is play it down and dont talk about foreign policy
HOWEVER he has gone full corbyn in his manifesto and that appears to have worked fairly well, so maybe he should just press on and at least he will have sincerity on his side...
HOWEVER he has gone full corbyn in his manifesto and that appears to have worked fairly well, so maybe he should just press on and at least he will have sincerity on his side...
zzr45
#MURDERINGSCUM
Except the fact that IS have claimed the attack and the pattern of IS inspired attacks that have happened recently.
No idea why I'd think that.
orly
Please check with me for Blammo criteria
IS have claimed it, sure, but intelligence services believe it is al-Qaeda.
Saying that overseas involvement has no impact on motivations for terrorism is quite clearly wrong.
As I said earlier though, that's a very anglo-centric view of the world. There are also a great many people being terrorised by these groups in the middle-east, and a great many more than are impacted here. Should we ignore that? My grandfather was Polish and in-laws Czech so appeasement has some slightly more personal elements to it, and many Czech's of that generation dislike the British enormously for Munich.
orly
Please check with me for Blammo criteria
Bruce, I'm not arguing that we shouldn't offer help overseas, I'm literally just talking about the idea that our involvement in overseas affairs has, to varying degrees, contributed to terrorist motivations. Not the sole driver.
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
whats that about mate?
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
both parties are utter bobbins -
This is what the IFS briefing says about Labour and Tory tax policies.
Labour have a set of policies intended to raise £49 billion per year from the “rich” and, overwhelmingly, from companies. The policies would indeed raise tax significantly. But the £49 billion calculation includes some factual mistakes with regard to part of their tax avoidance package, optimistic assumptions and unspecified tax increases. Their proposals could be expected to raise at most £40 billion in the short run, and less in the long run.
The large majority of Labour’s tax rises come from the taxation of companies. These can raise significant sums and the headline rate under Labour would still be the lowest in the G7. But as ever there are real trade-offs. Like all taxes these would reduce the incomes of UK citizens – through lower wages, higher prices, or lower investment returns including those accrued within private pensions;
The Conservatives have few tax proposals. Their promise to raise the income tax personal allowance to £12,500 would leave about 24 million basic rate payers £33 a year better off (in today’s prices). Factoring in the increase in the higher rate threshold too, around 4 million higher rate taxpayers would gain £208 per year in total. Approximately the highest-income ½ million individuals – who do not get a personal allowance – would gain £175 per year. The Conservatives have given themselves the freedom to raise rates of income tax and national insurance contributions, but have made no other commitments.
This is what the IFS briefing says about Labour and Tory tax policies.
Labour have a set of policies intended to raise £49 billion per year from the “rich” and, overwhelmingly, from companies. The policies would indeed raise tax significantly. But the £49 billion calculation includes some factual mistakes with regard to part of their tax avoidance package, optimistic assumptions and unspecified tax increases. Their proposals could be expected to raise at most £40 billion in the short run, and less in the long run.
The large majority of Labour’s tax rises come from the taxation of companies. These can raise significant sums and the headline rate under Labour would still be the lowest in the G7. But as ever there are real trade-offs. Like all taxes these would reduce the incomes of UK citizens – through lower wages, higher prices, or lower investment returns including those accrued within private pensions;
The Conservatives have few tax proposals. Their promise to raise the income tax personal allowance to £12,500 would leave about 24 million basic rate payers £33 a year better off (in today’s prices). Factoring in the increase in the higher rate threshold too, around 4 million higher rate taxpayers would gain £208 per year in total. Approximately the highest-income ½ million individuals – who do not get a personal allowance – would gain £175 per year. The Conservatives have given themselves the freedom to raise rates of income tax and national insurance contributions, but have made no other commitments.
The appeasement pact with Hitler that gave him free reign to take a large chunk of Czechoslovakia in the hope it would satisfy his ambitions in the region.
For sure, I don't doubt that, but equally standing by and doing nothing whilst Hussein did terrible things to the people of Iraq would not have been great for the people of Iraq either. I mean in Syria, for instance, Corbyn seems to be against military action there, whilst also seeming to pander to the Brexiters in his party who want to stop people leaving the country for safe haven elsewhere. If you were a Syrian you'd be perhaps forgiven for thinking that Britain wants nothing to do with you, which seems a pretty poor way to win friends and influence people too.
Seems unlikely there will ever be simple solutions to such issues, and we should be incredibly wary of those who pretend there are.
- Status