news & politics:discussion

[Ozanne]

35 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yes ok, hopefully, but it's that number. They should have never come out with it if they were going to be scared to promote it when got closer to an election...because no matter what, that looks like a further watering down of a supposed green new deal policy which is what they were all about. I wonder if Red Ed will quit if they do drop it?

There’s been no watering down of the policy. The article says that the central parts of the policy are being kept and Labour want to focus on the benefits rather than the costs. It seems some in the media are running these articles to try to cause issues for Labour. 

[Neil]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

Wow, UN security council just managed to pass something on Israel...but this one was watered down so US didn't veto again and now doesn't call for a ceasefire but just for more humanitarian aid...so Israel can carry on with their bloodlust but at least more bandaids will make it in. US and Russia both abstained...Russia because they were not happy with US not wanting a ceasefire and they're such peaceniks and not using this for political reasons at all , US because...well, f**k knows...they don't want to upset their Israeli mates.

But at least it does get UN more involved now. In practice now sure how much difference that means.

the un just voted to send their aid workers into a warzone. 😞 

[steviewevie]

12 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

There’s been no watering down of the policy. The article says that the central parts of the policy are being kept and Labour want to focus on the benefits rather than the costs. It seems some in the media are running these articles to try to cause issues for Labour. 

well Labour made a big deal about this 28 billion, maybe they should have never have come up with this number because it always looked overly ambitious, but now just looks like another u-turn. Anyway, we'll see what actually comes for it all, if they win power of course...

[Ozanne]

26 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

well Labour made a big deal about this 28 billion, maybe they should have never have come up with this number because it always looked overly ambitious, but now just looks like another u-turn. Anyway, we'll see what actually comes for it all, if they win power of course...

What have they u-turned on?

[Punksnotdead]

So, Wham is the Xmas number 1 - maybe we deserve World War 3 after all! 😠

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Is that a sustainable ceasefire ?  or a traditional ceasefire ?

a cessation of hostilities over the Christmas period so everyone can enjoy a drink and the tradition of bickering with families over monopoly house price rises instead of online 

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Barry Fish said:

That doesn't sound very sustainable to be honest ?   Probably need a few peace keepers...

thats what your kids are for 🙂 

[Ozanne]

41 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

a cessation of hostilities over the Christmas period so everyone can enjoy a drink and the tradition of bickering with families over monopoly house price rises instead of online 

There hasn’t been much arguing here at all recently. 

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

There hasn’t been much arguing here at all recently. 

Agree and long may it continue 

[Neil]

1 hour ago, Barry Fish said:

and meanwhile the reality in Gaza is nothing really changes because all the same key issues exist.

it doesn't need food it needs builders.

[Skip997]

40 minutes ago, Neil said:

it doesn't need food it needs builders.

WTF are you on about?

Gaza doesn’t need food?

Have you any idea what’s going on, and f**k the USA 

[Neil]

29 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

WTF are you on about?

have you seen any pictures of gaza lately? it needs builders!

[Neil]

59 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

What we need following the war is very strong effort to rebuild Gaza.  All these countries in the region should stop funding the terrorists, contribute to the rebuilding and putting in place proper representation for the people.  And then we can restart the peace plan.  Isreal should also roll back the illegal settlements.

Sadly, I think its all wishful thinking. 

Eitherway, should be a good time to be a builder etc...
 

funding the terrorists is simply using the only organisation with the structure to distribute aid. Israel is scared of the Palestinians building a solid civil society. theres an angle that can be found to say "bad for Israel" for anything which is a sustainable improvement.

[Skip997]

11 minutes ago, Neil said:

have you seen any pictures of gaza lately? it needs builders!

Yea it needs builders, but they won’t be able to do much work while starving.

[Neil]

1 hour ago, Skip997 said:

Yea it needs builders, but they won’t be able to do much work while starving.

they won't be able to do much cooking of food without kitchens. 

[Skip997]

Just now, Neil said:

they won't be able to do much cooking of food without kitchens. 

Clearly you’ve never travelled, millions of folk cook without kitchens. I’ve spent many years cooking without a kitchen in the past.

[Neil]

8 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

Clearly you’ve never travelled, millions of folk cook without kitchens. I’ve spent many years cooking without a kitchen in the past.

yes, i know i was being factious. 😛 

[Neil]

skippy, can you hear that whooshing sound?

[kalifire]

17 hours ago, Barry Fish said:

Whataboutery 

That can't be dismissed as "whataboutery" when it relates the other side in literally the same war, unless you're prepared to admit you're judging one party in absolute isolation from what the other side is doing, and the context of the entire thing to begin with. I know fish don't have good vision but come on.

[steviewevie]

15 hours ago, Ozanne said:

What have they u-turned on?

ok...err..don't know...what are their policies again? Their main one is this Green investment thingy, and I guess not u-turned but definitely getting watered down, well the amount is anyway. So, ok, maybe no actual u-turns, but Starmer does have a u-turny reputation after ditching most of his leadership bid promises, Tories use it to attack him, flip-flops etc; and the left feel they haven't got much to hold onto except maybe this invest in green stuff and want to see him stick to it. Again, they should have never come up with the number, don't pledge stuff you can't provide, like Rishi and his stop the boats thing.

[Neil]

40 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

ok...err..don't know...what are their policies again? Their main one is this Green investment thingy, and I guess not u-turned but definitely getting watered down, well the amount is anyway. So, ok, maybe no actual u-turns, but Starmer does have a u-turny reputation after ditching most of his leadership bid promises, Tories use it to attack him, flip-flops etc; and the left feel they haven't got much to hold onto except maybe this invest in green stuff and want to see him stick to it. Again, they should have never come up with the number, don't pledge stuff you can't provide, like Rishi and his stop the boats thing.

Watered down wouldn't be a turn it would be fulfilling the spending under control part.

[Ozanne]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

ok...err..don't know...what are their policies again? Their main one is this Green investment thingy, and I guess not u-turned but definitely getting watered down, well the amount is anyway. So, ok, maybe no actual u-turns, but Starmer does have a u-turny reputation after ditching most of his leadership bid promises, Tories use it to attack him, flip-flops etc; and the left feel they haven't got much to hold onto except maybe this invest in green stuff and want to see him stick to it. Again, they should have never come up with the number, don't pledge stuff you can't provide, like Rishi and his stop the boats thing.

The media are the ones that ask the questions about where will the money be coming from. We all know this it shouldn’t be a shock that Labour have to cost everything.

What part of the green policy have they watered down?

[steviewevie]

9 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

The media are the ones that ask the questions about where will the money be coming from. We all know this it shouldn’t be a shock that Labour have to cost everything.

What part of the green policy have they watered down?

the amount being invested. They said 28bill from start, then 28bill by end of parliament, and now looks like they're going to ditch the 28bill altogether.

[steviewevie]

...although...

 

[steviewevie]