What makes Corbyn's leadership and these numbers even worse is the Tories are in addition to making cuts are making a right hash of things. Osborne's Autumn statement U-Turns, Cameron's totally failing on his promise on immigration, the bullying scandal leading to a minister resigning, doctors strike, etc etc etc.
We aren't in a period like Blair 98, where they are promising honey for everybody and the press reporting his shits smell like alpine meadows.
Wow these numbers are epically bad. Any Labour MP who takes the future existence of his party even vaguely seriously should surely know what to do tomorrow.
A Benn led Labour party has a future, possibly with the Lib Dems. A Corbyn led one has a future too. About the same sort of future that an ISIL prisoner has when locked in a cage and someone gets the cameras out.
It's incredibly low of David Cameron to use the phrase "terrorist sympathisers" and it will be brutally effective. That's what the public believes and all discussion of it will only help the Conservatives. The yelps of outrage are what he wants.
I'm surprised Dave didn't contract it out to Michael Fallon like he did during the General Election.
Even I winced at that attack on Ed Miliband.
I winced at it as well. But it was the first proper strike of the election campaign, the tories knew that him stabbing his brother in the back was one of the few things that people knew about Ed, and didn't like him for it.
It's weird, being willing to stand for the leadership even though his brother was an obvious candidate was one of the things I liked about Ed M. Maybe it's because I too am a younger brother.
Mary Creagh: "What we want is a democratically-elected Syrian government in charge of a united country" .
Such political vision. Why has no one thought of it before?
In all seriousness, what was the context of that comment? I don't really see how it is relevant to anything being discussed, because that possibility is not on the table, not for a loooong time at least, so why bring it up? Is it to suggest other people don't want that?
In any case, since we're dreaming, shouldn't it be a 'democratically elected Syrian government in charge of a united country that also shares our values? I bet she wouldn't be happy if they elected in a government which did all sorts of things we disliked.
Perhaps time to recall the last time that we invaded Syria, though bombing the frogs on that occasion!
@MSmithsonPB: My conclusion from mounting leadership ratings is that in electoral terms Corbyn is a bigger negative with voters than Miliband or Brown
Miliband inspired indifference, Corbyn is different, he is like Thatcher in a way, that many people think he is the second coming, a saviour on earth, while others think he's a lunatic trot who has never come across an enemy of this country he hasnt wanted to hug.
At this point in the last parliament, Labour was drawing level with the Conservatives, with both parties scoring in high thirties, low forties and oscillating between the two. Labour really are in a mess.
As I am apparently unable to not see things positively for Labour (see my prediction of Lab majority up until Feb 2015, when I switched to Lab most seats), is there a possibility that Corbyn is soaking up so much of the negativity that if he does go at some point, and is replaced by someone semi sensible, that rather than the rest being tarred with the same brush, there will be a remarkable turnaround to them leading in the polls?
I know we'd expect them to be doing better, honeymoon period and all that, but clearly this is no normal leadership, so things could be different. And although it is apparent more MPs support him than we had seen reported, given the possibly low number of Lab MPs going to vote with the government, with the narrative being how little support he has there, might not they manage to avoid any blowback if electoral disaster forces him out? The narrative is that they too wanted him gone after all.
To replace Mr Corbyn with "someone sensible" will require a sea-change in Labour members' feelings.
If Mr Corbyn goes soon, that doesn't leave much time for the fervour to wane. The longer he stays, the fewer "sensible" people will be left.
"Sensible" members appear to be leaving. The boundary changes are going to force re-selections even if the will of the members doesn't, so "sensible" MPs are likely to be removed in about 4 years time.
What sort of party will that leave behind? Where will the "sensible" leader come from?
Case for intervention still not clear. Cameron should be persuading through argument not insults and threats.
You have to vote no.
One email, seen by The Telegraph, which was sent to more than 100 Labour MPs, stated: “We the Labour Party members will then deselect those Labour Party MPs who voted for the bombing of Syria because these MPs caused the blood on the hands of all Labour Party members. It is as simple as that.”
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Case for intervention still not clear. Cameron should be persuading through argument not insults and threats.
'Insults and threats' - that's Momentums way.
Vote 'No' or we'll have you deselected, Tory.
Indeed it's all toxic. Perhaps we should sort our own politics out and have a reasoned debate before we send the Raf into harms way.
What an irrelevant reason.
The RAF train to go 'into harms way'. It's part of the job of Warfighting, and they're supremely good at dealing with it, and emerging unscathed.
Whenever a QRA Typhoon goes up to escort an unknown aircraft out of UK airspace the crew are taking the risk that they might be shooting at or being shot down by a potential aggressor. Perish the thought that Labour want a debate every time something unknown appears on the radar.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
Take wraparound sunglasses and make sure you have somebody else to drive you (failing that, take a taxi). You should be OK inside a room, but sunlight will be uncomfortable at best.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
Take wraparound sunglasses and make sure you have somebody else to drive you (failing that, take a taxi). You should be OK inside a room, but sunlight will be uncomfortable at best.
Cheers, I've had this test for several years now am used to it.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
I've reread your remarks and the advice you've been given below, and I think I may not have made the point strong enough. Light levels inside a room are considerably less than those in sunlight, and you will notice the difference. You'll be able to cope well enough in a room but outside in sunlight you will be uncomfortable. Take sunglasses and make sure you have somebody else to drive you (failing that, take a taxi).
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
Take wraparound sunglasses and make sure you have somebody else to drive you (failing that, take a taxi). You should be OK inside a room, but sunlight will be uncomfortable at best.
Cheers, I've had this test for several years now am used to it.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
I've reread your remarks and the advice you've been given below, and I think I may not have made the point strong enough. Light levels inside a room are considerably less than those in sunlight, and you will notice the difference. You'll be able to cope well enough in a room but outside in sunlight you will be uncomfortable. Take sunglasses and make sure you have somebody else to drive you (failing that, take a taxi).
I will take sunglasses, and my Dad's driving me there and back again.
Case for intervention still not clear. Cameron should be persuading through argument not insults and threats.
You have to vote no.
The voters and MPs don't want to cower behind the sofa with you.
It's not about cowering it's about making sure it's not a gesture or counter productive.The risks are clear, the benefits are not proven.
They never are.
The risks of inaction are also clear. The benefits of inaction are not proven.
Pretending you want perfect knowledge is just an excuse.
IMO when it comes to bombing the burden of proof has to lie with those proposing action. And it should be quite a high bar.
Right now, I just wish that the PM and the rest of the MPs were debating this calmly, rationally and looking at the detail rather than the threats and name calling.
I find it fairly incredible that we are having such an epic debate about bombing on the other side of a boundary that our enemy does not recognise. In fairness Corbyn recognises that too which is why he is expressing doubts about Iraq as well.
We are being asked to join an existing Coalition already bombing with our 6 planes in compliance with a unanimous UN resolution against some of the most demented and evil people on the planet who wish us harm and the position of the Opposition seems to be we cannot possibly do so until we have a comprehensive and universally agreed peace plan for the whole of the middle east.
It really is bizarre. We take ourselves way, way too seriously.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
Perish the thought that Labour want a debate every time something unknown appears on the radar.
Burnham: "There's half a dozen terrorists shooting up central London, what should we do?"
Corbyn: "Well on the one hand that is bad, but we don't want the police to become inured to using excessive force. I need to think about this."
'Let's give Nick Palmer a call, and see what he thinks. And then we'll write a strongly worded letter. It would be a good idea to mention the potentially toxic effects of lead on local wildlife and watercourses. Ken must have an 'in' with the noise abatement people at City Hall'.
Case for intervention still not clear. Cameron should be persuading through argument not insults and threats.
You have to vote no.
Of course its clear. But what 'intervention' ? ISIS is already being bombed in the territory it holds in Syria by our allies. And Russia. ISIS is already being bombed by us and our allies in the land it holds in Iraq (another of our allies). There is a UN resolution mandating it. If this UN resolution is not mandating it then why is the Sec Gen of the UN not complaining about it?
It is pathetic that Corbyn and his hard far left friends (you?) are using this serious matter as a means of gaining control of the Labour Party.
What makes Corbyn's leadership and these numbers even worse is the Tories are in addition to making cuts are making a right hash of things. Osborne's Autumn statement U-Turns, Cameron's totally failing on his promise on immigration, the bullying scandal leading to a minister resigning, doctors strike, etc etc etc.
We aren't in a period like Blair 98, where they are promising honey for everybody and the press reporting his shits smell like alpine meadows.
Cheer up: 1. Ozzie is still going to balance the books. 2. Cam's trying on immigration but the pesky EU won't accept reasonable actions, yet. 3. Bullying has nothing to do with policy. 4. Doctors strike called off. 5,6,7 etc, etc etc
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Are you serious? Corbyn has waited all his life to take over the Labour Party. He is as happy as a pig in sh!t.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Are you serious? Corbyn has waited all his life to take over the Labour Party. He is as happy as a pig in sh!t.
I'd have thought he never considered it a possibility. Didn't he only stand because it was his turn to come last?
This is odd. Can't see any way JC could have prevented the pro-war labour MPs from voting for bombing.
If he whipped the vote, the MPs preparing to rebel would have received even more aggressive abuse than they are receiving in this current free vote environment. Under those circumstances it's reasonable to assume Mr Cameron may have pulled the vote citing a lack of cross-party support...
Case for intervention still not clear. Cameron should be persuading through argument not insults and threats.
You have to vote no.
Of course its clear. But what 'intervention' ? ISIS is already being bombed in the territory it holds in Syria by our allies. And Russia. ISIS is already being bombed by us and our allies in the land it holds in Iraq (another of our allies). There is a UN resolution mandating it. If this UN resolution is not mandating it then why is the Sec Gen of the UN not complaining about it?
It is pathetic that Corbyn and his hard far left friends (you?) are using this serious matter as a means of gaining control of the Labour Party.
Don't agree with Corbyn. Don't agree with Cameron.
Would like to be convinced that we can get rid of ISIS, but am simply not persuaded today. (This is okay and what democratic debate should be about.)
This is odd. Can't see any way JC could have prevented the pro-war labour MPs from voting for bombing.
If he whipped the vote, the MPs preparing to rebel would have received even more aggressive abuse than they are receiving in this current free vote environment. Under those circumstances it's reasonable to assume Mr Cameron may have pulled the vote citing a lack of cross-party support...
hm, I suppose so.
seems churlish to blame Corbyn for not having enough support in his party to whip the vote tho
Case for intervention still not clear. Cameron should be persuading through argument not insults and threats.
You have to vote no.
Of course its clear. But what 'intervention' ? ISIS is already being bombed in the territory it holds in Syria by our allies. And Russia. ISIS is already being bombed by us and our allies in the land it holds in Iraq (another of our allies). There is a UN resolution mandating it. If this UN resolution is not mandating it then why is the Sec Gen of the UN not complaining about it?
It is pathetic that Corbyn and his hard far left friends (you?) are using this serious matter as a means of gaining control of the Labour Party.
Don't agree with Corbyn. Don't agree with Cameron.
Would like to be convinced that we can get rid of ISIS, but am simply not persuaded today. (This is okay and what democratic debate should be about.)
Want to know my little secret.
Hilary Benn has made a more elegant and persuasive argument for intervention than Dave has.
Mary Creagh: "What we want is a democratically-elected Syrian government in charge of a united country"
And I want to live in a gold-plated mansion.
Do you think that Mary Creagh's ambition is more or less likely to be achieved if IS are removed or if they stay?
her remarks are valid. Only democracy will end the evil of religious bigotry. The democracy will probably have to be some sort of coalition sharing but change and protection from sectarianism can only come from democratic decisions. Of course currently we see labour activists attempting to impose their opinion by intimidation bordering on violence.
This is odd. Can't see any way JC could have prevented the pro-war labour MPs from voting for bombing.
If he whipped the vote, the MPs preparing to rebel would have received even more aggressive abuse than they are receiving in this current free vote environment. Under those circumstances it's reasonable to assume Mr Cameron may have pulled the vote citing a lack of cross-party support...
Yes - Cameron said he wanted broad consensus - you don't have that with the Opposition opposed.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Are you serious? Corbyn has waited all his life to take over the Labour Party. He is as happy as a pig in sh!t.
I'm not so sure.
I rewatched The Dark Knight a few days ago and there is a passage in that with The Joker that reminds me of Corbyn: Do I look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught it.
Corbyn isn't a guy with a plan. He never meant to catch the leadership. He's spent his whole career as a purist doing what he wants. Nothing is changing just because he got the leadership almost by accident.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Are you serious? Corbyn has waited all his life to take over the Labour Party. He is as happy as a pig in sh!t.
I'm not so sure.
I rewatched The Dark Knight a few days ago and there is a passage in that with The Joker that reminds me of Corbyn: Do I look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught it.
Corbyn isn't a guy with a plan. He never meant to catch the leadership. He's spent his whole career as a purist doing what he wants. Nothing is changing just because he got the leadership almost by accident.
Worth noting the joker was lying. He did have a plan, it was just ridiculously convoluted and reliant on coincidence, and expecting everyone else to act in accordance with his plans. Nothing like Corbyn, who probably didn't have a plan but now does.
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Are you serious? Corbyn has waited all his life to take over the Labour Party. He is as happy as a pig in sh!t.
I'm not so sure.
I rewatched The Dark Knight a few days ago and there is a passage in that with The Joker that reminds me of Corbyn: Do I look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught it.
Corbyn isn't a guy with a plan. He never meant to catch the leadership. He's spent his whole career as a purist doing what he wants. Nothing is changing just because he got the leadership almost by accident.
I think that's true as far as it goes, but it overlooks the nature of the very-left-wing section of the PLP. They said at the time of Mr Corbyn's election that they don't have a 'leader', they have a committee.
So what Mr Corbyn intends, or doesn't intend, hardly matters. He's only the figurehead for the rest of the group.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
Roberts... Kitchener?
Slim is certainly an outstanding candidate. I believe he said that the British Army always seemed to fight its battles with its back to a river and at the point where 2 maps joined.
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Are you serious? Corbyn has waited all his life to take over the Labour Party. He is as happy as a pig in sh!t.
I'm not so sure.
I rewatched The Dark Knight a few days ago and there is a passage in that with The Joker that reminds me of Corbyn: Do I look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught it.
Corbyn isn't a guy with a plan. He never meant to catch the leadership. He's spent his whole career as a purist doing what he wants. Nothing is changing just because he got the leadership almost by accident.
Worth noting the joker was lying. He did have a plan, it was just ridiculously convoluted and reliant on coincidence, and expecting everyone else to act in accordance with his plans. Nothing like Corbyn, who probably didn't have a plan but now does.
Corbyn may have a plan from one battle to the next but I don't think that he has a plan that leads from here to the next Election putting him into Downing Street.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
Lets be clear here, the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor are not terrorist sympathisers, they are supporters of terrorism.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
It is a UK list. One irony is that there seem to be a fair number of maverick German Generals and mostly fairly rule bound British ones, a national stereotype in reverse...
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
Just British I think and I am sure that Auckinleck will get a mention. I would add Mansein to any German list
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
Just a UK list, Mr. T.. Dr Sox suggested that Slim might have been the most outstanding British General of WW2, I said that was faint praise he was the best we have had since Wellington Dr Sox said Ok he is a candidate for that accolade.
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
I think he was referring to the pressure from Stopthewar/Momentum as much as anything. It strikes me as something that needs to be said - not least to the thick headed tendency on the tory backbenches. ''Prime Minister urges Conservatives not to 'sit on your hands' while Labour MPs are left in tears over 'bullying' tactics ahead of air strikes vote'' (Telegraph)
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
Just a UK list, Mr. T.. Dr Sox suggested that Slim might have been the most outstanding British General of WW2, I said that was faint praise he was the best we have had since Wellington Dr Sox said Ok he is a candidate for that accolade.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
Just a UK list, Mr. T.. Dr Sox suggested that Slim might have been the most outstanding British General of WW2, I said that was faint praise he was the best we have had since Wellington Dr Sox said Ok he is a candidate for that accolade.
I did not want to upset Alanbrooke!
Ah ... yes. Another contender but not one who decided issues in the field.
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
So not all Labour MPs are terrorist sympathisers, just some of them. Just the ones with the top jobs. Well, that's OK, then. I was a bit worried for a moment.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
Lets be clear here, the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor are not terrorist sympathisers, they are supporters of terrorism.
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
I think it is very helpful for the Tories in the longer term but must make it very hard for Labour MPs to vote with the Conservatives tomorrow - oops, I mean today. They could still abstain though?
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
I think it is very helpful for the Tories in the longer term but must make it very hard for Labour MPs to vote with the Conservatives tomorrow - oops, I mean today. They could still abstain though?
Cameron's got the votes already. He may have cost himself 30 off the majority but I still expect it to be 100 or thereabouts.
My time to resign from the Labour Party again may have arrived. So it was not just Bliar. There are plenty of other warmongers in the party. But too cowardly to send in any troops.
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
Just a UK list, Mr. T.. Dr Sox suggested that Slim might have been the most outstanding British General of WW2, I said that was faint praise he was the best we have had since Wellington Dr Sox said Ok he is a candidate for that accolade.
I did not want to upset Alanbrooke!
I am a great fan of Slim, but think that Orde Wingate has to be at least competitive.
As Dair & antifrank have noted, getting the "terrorist sympathiser" line out there amongst all of this is solid gold for the Tories, if not very PM-like.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
I think it is very helpful for the Tories in the longer term but must make it very hard for Labour MPs to vote with the Conservatives tomorrow - oops, I mean today. They could still abstain though?
Cameron's got the votes already. He may have cost himself 30 off the majority but I still expect it to be 100 or thereabouts.
I think he's got a majority. Not sure about the size of it. My interpretation is that he thinks the Labour rebellion is built on sand and doesn't want to be reliant on it, so is trying to firm up Tory support. Then he's got a barish majority with the Unionists and LDs.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
In hindsight, tomorrow was an appalling day to schedule my diabetic retinopathy.
All the best for tomorrow!
It's fine, just means I can't watch tv/look at a computer/tablet/phone for a couple of hours
*shudder*
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
Are you serious? Corbyn has waited all his life to take over the Labour Party. He is as happy as a pig in sh!t.
I'm not so sure.
I rewatched The Dark Knight a few days ago and there is a passage in that with The Joker that reminds me of Corbyn: Do I look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught it.
Corbyn isn't a guy with a plan. He never meant to catch the leadership. He's spent his whole career as a purist doing what he wants. Nothing is changing just because he got the leadership almost by accident.
At the height of my ELBOW polling average thingy in the run-up to the election, I said:
"Do I really look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing Opinion Polls. I wouldn't know what to do with one if I caught it! You know, I just...DO things."
... General Slim's capture of Deir el Zor and Raqqa was particularly daring. Quite possible the outstanding British General of WW2 ...
Slim possibly the outstanding British General of WW2? Gosh talk about faint praise. Slim was without a doubt the best General we have had since Wellington.
Certainly a strong candidate for that accolade. Joined the Army as a private in WW1 before getting commissioned.
As did General Robertson who was CIGS 1916-1918, what a wicked place of hidebound privilege the old army was.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
No Patton? Rommel? Guderian? Or is it just a UK list?
Just a UK list, Mr. T.. Dr Sox suggested that Slim might have been the most outstanding British General of WW2, I said that was faint praise he was the best we have had since Wellington Dr Sox said Ok he is a candidate for that accolade.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
IDS is nothing like Corbyn!
He had similarly dire ratings like Corbyn and won 60% of members but did not have the backing of his MPs
The similarities are shallow. Corbyn is not the quiet man.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
IDS is nothing like Corbyn!
He had similarly dire ratings like Corbyn and won 60% of members but did not have the backing of his MPs
The similarities are shallow. Corbyn is not the quiet man.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
February 2003 was a year and a half into his leadership not a matter of weeks and still in what should be a honeymoon period. Try comparing like for like.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
February 2003 was a year and a half into his leadership not a matter of weeks and still in what should be a honeymoon period. Try comparing like for like.
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
Maybe I'm a bit ruthless but I think whoever succeeds Corbyn should expel Corbyn and his band of merry travelers from the party. Anything to cleanse the brand as quickly as possible.
Disagree, as many of the Corbyn backers will still be needed to win with swing voters added onto them. Cameron did not expel IDS did he, despite similarly dire ratings under his leadership, in fact he even ended up in the Cabinet
IDS is nothing like Corbyn!
The pious man is here to stay, and he's burning down the commune!
The conquest, subjugation and occupation of backward Islamic caliphates and states, and the installation of secular client strongmen in the Assad/Saddam/Ghaddafi mould.
The powerful civilised states - US, Russia, Europeans, China, etc - should agree a carve-up and thus share the risks and the spoils of such a venture.
And a declaration that followers of radical Islam are perpetui inimici (Perpetual enemies) of the world, and will be treated as outlaws wherever they are found, especially in the civilised world.
Won't happen of course.
Instead, we'll just half-heartedly poke a stick at them, and wait for their inevitable response...
Comments
Vote 'No' or we'll have you deselected, Tory.
We aren't in a period like Blair 98, where they are promising honey for everybody and the press reporting his shits smell like alpine meadows.
A Benn led Labour party has a future, possibly with the Lib Dems. A Corbyn led one has a future too. About the same sort of future that an ISIL prisoner has when locked in a cage and someone gets the cameras out.
If Mr Corbyn goes soon, that doesn't leave much time for the fervour to wane. The longer he stays, the fewer "sensible" people will be left.
"Sensible" members appear to be leaving. The boundary changes are going to force re-selections even if the will of the members doesn't, so "sensible" MPs are likely to be removed in about 4 years time.
What sort of party will that leave behind? Where will the "sensible" leader come from?
One email, seen by The Telegraph, which was sent to more than 100 Labour MPs, stated: “We the Labour Party members will then deselect those Labour Party MPs who voted for the bombing of Syria because these MPs caused the blood on the hands of all Labour Party members. It is as simple as that.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/12028017/David-Cameron-tells-Tory-MPs-Ignore-the-terrorist-sympathisers-and-vote-for-Syrian-bombing.html
Such torment would be more than I could bear.
A pleasant night to all. Particularly to Jeremy Corbyn. Not because I think his views, in general, are good ones, but I feel like he has been having a rough time as of late, when he probably expected a much more peaceful year.
The RAF train to go 'into harms way'. It's part of the job of Warfighting, and they're supremely good at dealing with it, and emerging unscathed.
Whenever a QRA Typhoon goes up to escort an unknown aircraft out of UK airspace the crew are taking the risk that they might be shooting at or being shot down by a potential aggressor. Perish the thought that Labour want a debate every time something unknown appears on the radar.
Listening to the Parliament channel should be fine
The risks of inaction are also clear. The benefits of inaction are not proven.
Pretending you want perfect knowledge is just an excuse.
Right now, I just wish that the PM and the rest of the MPs were debating this calmly, rationally and looking at the detail rather than the threats and name calling.
We are being asked to join an existing Coalition already bombing with our 6 planes in compliance with a unanimous UN resolution against some of the most demented and evil people on the planet who wish us harm and the position of the Opposition seems to be we cannot possibly do so until we have a comprehensive and universally agreed peace plan for the whole of the middle east.
It really is bizarre. We take ourselves way, way too seriously.
Corbyn: "Well on the one hand that is bad, but we don't want the police to become inured to using excessive force. I need to think about this."
But what 'intervention' ? ISIS is already being bombed in the territory it holds in Syria by our allies. And Russia. ISIS is already being bombed by us and our allies in the land it holds in Iraq (another of our allies).
There is a UN resolution mandating it. If this UN resolution is not mandating it then why is the Sec Gen of the UN not complaining about it?
It is pathetic that Corbyn and his hard far left friends (you?) are using this serious matter as a means of gaining control of the Labour Party.
1. Ozzie is still going to balance the books.
2. Cam's trying on immigration but the pesky EU won't accept reasonable actions, yet.
3. Bullying has nothing to do with policy.
4. Doctors strike called off.
5,6,7 etc, etc etc
"They said we should throw things at them"
"The terrorists?"
"No, the police..."
This is odd. Can't see any way JC could have prevented the pro-war labour MPs from voting for bombing.
Don't agree with Cameron.
Would like to be convinced that we can get rid of ISIS, but am simply not persuaded today. (This is okay and what democratic debate should be about.)
seems churlish to blame Corbyn for not having enough support in his party to whip the vote tho
Hilary Benn has made a more elegant and persuasive argument for intervention than Dave has.
Of course currently we see labour activists attempting to impose their opinion by intimidation bordering on violence.
Anyway, if Slim is only a candidate for best general since Wellington who are the other front runners? Bob Napier, Paddy Gough and Colin Campbell from the 19th century I suppose, though I am not sure any of them are in quite the same league. As for the 20th century who is there even to consider? Montgomery, Haig, Alexander, Gough (Paddy's great nephew), Dempsey, Rawlinson, Plumer, Allenby? No, they won't do.
I was rather more impressed that he used to be a primary school teacher before he took to soldiering.
I rewatched The Dark Knight a few days ago and there is a passage in that with The Joker that reminds me of Corbyn: Do I look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught it.
Corbyn isn't a guy with a plan. He never meant to catch the leadership. He's spent his whole career as a purist doing what he wants. Nothing is changing just because he got the leadership almost by accident.
So what Mr Corbyn intends, or doesn't intend, hardly matters. He's only the figurehead for the rest of the group.
Slim is certainly an outstanding candidate. I believe he said that the British Army always seemed to fight its battles with its back to a river and at the point where 2 maps joined.
Presumably Cameron will clarify tomorrow that he did not intend to suggest that all those voting against the motion were terrorist sympathisers; he was specifically referring to the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor.
@MBE
I stand corrected!
I would add Mansein to any German list
''Prime Minister urges Conservatives not to 'sit on your hands' while Labour MPs are left in tears over 'bullying' tactics ahead of air strikes vote'' (Telegraph)
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/88/Political-Monitor-Satisfaction-Ratings-1997Present.aspx?view=wide
"Do I really look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing Opinion Polls. I wouldn't know what to do with one if I caught it! You know, I just...DO things."
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/corbyn-has-done-enough-damage-to-labour-its-time-for-him-to-step-down/
Jeremy Corbyn.
You were slightly less shit than Iain Duncan Smith.
But not by much.
EJ Thribb, aged 17 1/2.
There is really only one solution.
The conquest, subjugation and occupation of backward Islamic caliphates and states, and the installation of secular client strongmen in the Assad/Saddam/Ghaddafi mould.
The powerful civilised states - US, Russia, Europeans, China, etc - should agree a carve-up and thus share the risks and the spoils of such a venture.
And a declaration that followers of radical Islam are perpetui inimici (Perpetual enemies) of the world, and will be treated as outlaws wherever they are found, especially in the civilised world.
Won't happen of course.
Instead, we'll just half-heartedly poke a stick at them, and wait for their inevitable response...