Current Affairs 2017 General Election

2017 general election

  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 24 6.5%
  • Labour

    Votes: 264 71.0%
  • Tories

    Votes: 41 11.0%
  • Cheese on the ballot paper

    Votes: 35 9.4%
  • SNP

    Votes: 4 1.1%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 4 1.1%

  • Total voters
    372
Status
Not open for further replies.
Because the example your giving is utterly divorced from the reality of this situation. If this is about the Western Oppression then why aren't suicide bombers attacking military installations? One could argue the attack on the USS Cole, the attack on Westminster (to a certain extent) and even the Lee Rigby attack was aimed at the tools of 'Western Oppression' and, in the example you gave could be absolutely justifiable against an 'Islamist Oppressor.'

But the attacking of crowds of people out enjoying life with no links to the military complex? Really? That's justifiable?

Who is saying it is justifiable?

They attack weak targets - those kids on the buses in Syria, the poor Coptic Egyptians today, the concert-goers on Monday - because it is easy, it guarantees days / weeks of global media coverage (well, attacks in the West anyway), and because it doesn't markedly affect Western policy with regards to the region.

If they attacked a head of state, or carried out a mass casualty attack that killed too many people, then the chances go up that the West would reassess how it functions and make changes that start to negatively effect them. This is after all what happened after the Paris murders, when the horror of what they did, and the threat they represented, concentrated minds and brought about a little reconciliation in Syria.

That little reconciliation has put the SDF within three kilometers of Raqqa, and the Iraqi Army controlling 93% of Mosul. If we co-operate more than we have done (edit: and especially stop talking about attacking the Syrian Government) they are finished.
 
You keep implying (stating, actually) that I am "justifying" all this. That is quite simply not the case. But I do seek to understand why this sort of atrocity might happen. One of the problems with people such as yourself is that you see (often wilfully, it seems to me) any attempt to explain or understand or make sense of as an attempt to justify.

And, frankly, it reflects pretty poorly on you and adds nothing to solving the whole big bloody mess.
I'm sorry, you are completely justifying it as a penance for Western aggression. Don't worry if you can't see how you are doing it, it's part of the Western guilt that comes the beliefs you hold. Learn to love yourself. And why has this extremism spread rapidly? Because we've made those who believe in it very rich through buying oil from them. Just like the southern landowners in the South US had enough money and influence to fight a war based on the belief that they should be able to own another race in the 1800's.

To me it seems you don't want to understand anything that doesn't conform to your belief that Western interventionism has been the lynchpin of the rise of extreme Islam.
 
I'm sorry, you are completely justifying it as a penance for Western aggression. Don't worry if you can't see how you are doing it, it's part of the Western guilt that comes the beliefs you hold. Learn to love yourself. And why has this extremism spread rapidly? Because we've made those who believe in it very rich through buying oil from them. Just like the southern landowners in the South US had enough money and influence to fight a war based on the belief that they should be able to own another race in the 1800's.

To me it seems you don't want to understand anything that doesn't conform to your belief that Western interventionism has been the lynchpin of the rise of extreme Islam.

Whereas, to me, you have no interest in acknowledging self-evident causalities in all of this. Disappointing that you put that "learn to love yourself" comment in, too. Sort of undermines the critical veracity of your argument, no?

Here's some tobacco for your pipe - I love myself, I love my life, love my country and I love my muslim brothers and sisters.

Learn to love all of us, Brother - no matter our colour or creed.
 
I get what you say but think the dementia tax allied with the general political turmoil has made a section of the formerly-disinterested, interested. There also seems a genuine worry about the NHS and a gradual war-weariness. And then there's the matter of Theresa May being ever more unconvincing as a competent, trustworthy PM.

Given your constant chiding of the press, I thought you'd be above tabloid like labeling of taxes like that. Whatever it may be, it's most certainly not a tax on dementia. It has as much basis as 'IRA sympathiser'. Cheap.
 
I beg to differ - and it's interesting that, of all that's been said, this is what you choose to pick up on.

By all means point me to anywhere in the manifesto where it says people with dementia will be taxed on account of their condition, but on the off chance you can't do that, maybe stop using the moniker, because it makes your regular gripes about the 'bias media' sound less like a plea for more equality of coverage and more like sour grapes that the biased media isn't supporting your man.

Re the rest of the last few pages, a lot better people than me have tried (and failed) to make a difference in the middle-east, so I'm not sure what I've got to contribute on the matter tbh.
 
By all means point me to anywhere in the manifesto where it says people with dementia will be taxed on account of their condition, but on the off chance you can't do that, maybe stop using the moniker, because it makes your regular gripes about the 'bias media' sound less like a plea for more equality of coverage and more like sour grapes that the biased media isn't supporting your man.

Sorry, did you think I was actually claiming it was called "The Dementia Tax" by Theresa May? I apologise for any confusion.

Re the rest of the last few pages, a lot better people than me have tried (and failed) to make a difference in the middle-east, so I'm not sure what I've got to contribute on the matter tbh.

My *DisingenuousReplyAlert* is off the register here. As we all know, we weren't trying to solve the problems of the Middle East in the last few pages. Slippery customer, you.
 
It seems labour are anti foreign war but pro free and open borders.

But the tories are pro war but anti open immigration.

Why on earth is neither party anti foreign war and anti uncontrolled immigration. Most of the population would support this.
 
It seems labour are anti foreign war but pro free and open borders.

But the tories are pro war but anti open immigration.

Why on earth is neither party anti foreign war and anti uncontrolled immigration. Most of the population would support this.

Hello Ukip.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top