UK Politics Mega-thread - Page 417
Forum Index > General Forum |
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22208 Posts
| ||
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On March 13 2018 13:47 KwarK wrote: The racism excuse was nothing more than a cheap attempt at to deflect blame onto a group the Daily Mail crowd were already eager to blame. The same police repeatedly failed when it was rich white men, politicians, well connected BBC personalities and so forth. But suddenly when it’s Asians they insist it’s not their fault for being complicit and not giving a shit, it’s really that they were too afraid of appearing racist. As if that would make any fucking difference to any moral human being in the face of child abuse. And as if they’re not perfectly happy to deal with any other crime committed by minorities without worrying about appearances. There is absolutely no question of whether the police failed these children. The PC excuse is an insult to the intelligence of anyone they tell it to. I have more of an insight into this than most people because I have a brother who's liased with the police on these very issues as a social worker. Ironically, the problem is threefold. Maybe even fourfold. 1) the decentralisation of policing, i.e. city councils have responsibility to sort it out, 2) people OTHER than the criminals with a political agenda and 3) the Daily Mail in particular loving to make a sensation out of every one of these incidents and especially focusing on ones where an immigrant and/or person of non-white skin colour is involved (the more the better). 3 feeds into 2 feeds into 1. Because of 3, these incidents lead to an entire ethnic minority getting abuse for a period of time because the Mail loves to whip its readers into a frenzy, leading into 2, where powerful voices in that minority community start leaping down the council's throat and threatening to cause a fuss and accuse them of racism (which is bad and can lead to the government awarding fewer funds etc.) leading into 1, where the council doesn't want the police to cause them grief, and if they do will retaliate with funding cuts or other pressure. This leads to police forces being softly-softly about the matter because it'll get national press attention in a lot of cases, which councils don't want. Leading into... 4) Police in the UK don't like to act too soon. My brother worked with the police to break up a major child prostitution ring that operated out of our childhood holiday resort, one of the biggest such rings in the North East (run by a perfectly white grandmother and her family. Lovely folks), and they had more than enough to move on them after a few months, but the police didn't act for over a year, because they don't want to until they're confident they have everything. They want to be sure they get everyone even tangentially involved dead to rights with no hope of walking away from court on technicalities or the like, and if a new suspect enters the fray in the last part of an investigation they extend it further in case the same thing happens, while gathering info on the new person to be sure they go down as well. Problem is, the optics of that approach are bloody awful, as I'm sure you can see, because it means people get hurt in the short term while they try and burn the root and branch to ensure nobody gets hurt later. Now obviously most of the above applies only to the County Durham and Newcastle police, but he's worked elsewhere in the country and suspects most police in most places operate under the same kind of mentality as the basic issues are true almost everywhere. Muslim and Indian community leaders are especially adept at thumbscrewing councils, and they usually have an axe to grind over one thing or another so will leap at any chance to push for whatever it is the council won't give them. | ||
Sent.
Poland9209 Posts
May’s toothless tough talk on Russia What looks like perpetual conflict is actually cozy symbiosis, with each side feeding off the other. Never mind the talk of a new Cold War between Moscow and the West. A year from now, when the poisoning on British soil of a former Russian spy is yesterday’s news, it’s likely to be business as usual between Russia and the U.K. Look at the last time a similar attack was carried out: in 2006, when fugitive Russian intelligence agent Aleksandr Litvinenko was killed by radioactive poison in London. Less than a year later, the British oil giant BP was in talks with President Vladimir Putin’s government to buy a chunk of assets it had confiscated from the Russian oil company Yukos. That despite the fact that the firm’s former owner, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was serving a 10-year jail sentence — as a political prisoner. BP failed to buy those assets at the time, but it was eventually rewarded with a share in Rosneft, a company largely made up of what used to be Yukos’ oil empire and led by Putin’s crony Igor Sechin, currently on the U.S. sanctions list for his alleged role in Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine. President of BP Group Bob Dudley now sits on the Rosneft board, together with former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. Response to the recent assassination attempt, in which the Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter were poisoned by a military-grade nerve agent, is likely to follow a similar pattern. Indeed, British Prime Minister Theresa May’s “measured and conventional” response to the attack — which largely consisted of expelling two dozen Russian diplomats and refusing to attend the World Cup in Russia — felt like nothing more than a careful reenactment of classic Cold War scenography. (...) What Moscow would find far less desirable would be any kind of threat to the assets of its oligarchic class. But it can feel pretty safe on that front: It is highly unlikely that May’s Brexit government will precipitate a multi-billion cash outflow for the sake of something it lacks anyway: principles. London is the de-facto capital of the post-Soviet mafia state. It accumulates a lion’s share of oligarchic assets from everywhere in the ex-USSR. It is the hometown of the billionaires and former state officials who played key roles in consolidating kleptocratic regimes in Russia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan and the rest of the post-Soviet region. The U.K. is where they build their luxury homes and moor their yachts; it’s where their wives go on shopping sprees, their children attend elite schools, and their football clubs spar in Premier League matches. It’s also where a horde of British bankers, lawyers, security experts, political consultants and other professionals enjoy a luxurious life thanks to money siphoned away from troubled post-communist nations. From the post-Soviet perspective, the Kremlin and the Western political elite often look like a pair of con artists, one of whom plays a villain and the other a good Samaritan. The staged conflict is convincing, and you might even find yourself captivated by its twists and turns. But the ultimate goal is to rob you of your hard-earned cash. Much of the post-Soviet cynicism toward the West stems from this perception. Putin’s regime is highly enthusiastic about its role as a dark alien force in the Western political theater, one that is perpetually trying to sow discord into the sweet and comfortable Hobbit Shire. It puts up an inspiring performance, to the undisguised enthusiasm of conspiracy theorists and professional Russophobes, who return the favor, feeding Kremlin propaganda outlets with priceless material and helping to maintain a siege mentality among brainwashed Russians. (...) But don’t expect anything different. Why harm a lucrative joint venture when you can simply fake outrage at your mischievous business partners? https://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-russia-poisoning-toothless-tough-talk-on-russia/ Why would you want anything different? | ||
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
Once we've left the EU we'll need a trade deal with Russia. It simply is not practical to cut off all ties with them in perpetuity. | ||
Sermokala
United States13974 Posts
For those not watching Basicaly the speaker or moderator of the British parliment is picked by the leading party. That person is given a house and a point of being the moderator of the debates that go on and so forth. He however can't vote nor take part in the debates himself. but heres the kicker. In perpetuty while hes the speaker his seat never comes up for reelection. He will remain in parliament and can only lose his spot in parliment the election after the party that took him to power is out of power. I can't imagine that in a country the size of America where a senate seat would simply not be contended nor be given a vote. Is this not that big of a deal that I'm making it out to be? | ||
![]()
KwarK
United States42887 Posts
On March 19 2018 12:59 Sermokala wrote: I can't imagine that in a country the size of America where a senate seat would simply not be contended nor be given a vote. Is this not that big of a deal that I'm making it out to be? Give the residents of DC representation. | ||
KlaCkoN
Sweden1661 Posts
| ||
Schmobutzen
Germany284 Posts
| ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21758 Posts
On March 19 2018 20:33 Schmobutzen wrote: Doesn't anybody here think, that the foregone conclusion, that Russia is guilty of the poison attack, and (!) playing on that with sanctions, is so preposterous, that one just can't take the foreign office of the UK any seriously? Declared war on Russia isn't really an option. So what other response can the UK make? | ||
Schmobutzen
Germany284 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States23287 Posts
On March 19 2018 20:57 Gorsameth wrote: Declared war on Russia isn't really an option. So what other response can the UK make? I've heard decades of proxy wars can be a profitable strategy. I may know a country willing to help provide the kind of arms and clandestine back channels it may require to do such a thing should a nation like the UK be so inclined. I joke, but I wouldn't put the general concept of increasing pressures on more vulnerable Russian interests outside it's borders with actions beyond sanctions out of the realm of possibilities. I don't know the political viability of something like that though as I'm not heavily engaged in the Domestic politics of the UK, nor whether it's within the capabilities/ethics of your current clandestine agencies for the same reasons. | ||
Acrofales
Spain18041 Posts
On March 19 2018 21:10 Schmobutzen wrote: None! The whole Russia was it-thing is stupid, without evidence! It looks like WMD in Iraq all over! So... you, with all your internet wisdom, know that Schotland Yard is wrong, because... ??? | ||
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
On March 19 2018 21:16 Acrofales wrote: So... you, with all your internet wisdom, know that Schotland Yard is wrong, because... ??? I think a level of caution is prudent purely because less than 20 years ago a government led us into war. It's not about knowing whether Scotland Yard is right or wrong, but that we don't know - and that's the point. | ||
Schmobutzen
Germany284 Posts
And the whole procedure of not sending the poison to Russia and not giving it in a timely manner to the international institutions reeks of something. Acrofales - it has nothing to do with my wisdom, just with the shaby procedure and finger pointing without due process. | ||
Dan HH
Romania9127 Posts
On March 19 2018 21:10 Schmobutzen wrote: None! The whole Russia was it-thing is stupid, without evidence! It looks like WMD in Iraq all over! Even if your conspiracy theory were true, and it isn't, they knowingly opened this possibility by killing dissidents before in exotic ways and by publicly threatening people like Skripal right after the prisoner exchange. Frankly I'll have no sympathy for their regime if at some point this does happen. It's a moronic risk they've taken to puff their chest at 'traitors'. | ||
farvacola
United States18831 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States23287 Posts
On March 19 2018 21:51 farvacola wrote: It's also incoherent to decry inferences drawn in favor of Russian culpability while drawing equally if not less supported inferences in favor of the attacks figuring as fabricated pretextual casus belli. Would it still be incoherent if one weighed the fallout of believing one vs the other and being wrong and determined they'd rather their skepticism unwarranted (or the linking to acts of war at least) and finding out later it was in fact Russia, than accepting the widespread presumption and being wrong? | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21758 Posts
We know Russia has a history and motive for the attack but lets assume what your saying that Scotland Yard is lying. Why, for what reason and who could have done it instead that needs to be hidden. And please, please tell me the UK government nerve gassed its own people so it could dismiss a few diplomats and impose some weak sanctions. | ||
Schmobutzen
Germany284 Posts
Farvacola, you are right. My comparison with Iraq's WMD smells a bit like that, but I just meant it in a provocative way, to make sure that an assumption and a finger pointing without presented evidence is just not gallant. | ||
| ||