| Starmer 16:33 - Mar 3 with 2662 views | DorsetIan |
Thatcher's fortunes were turned around by her leadership around the Falklands and I think the country also liked the way she took a leading role in the Cold War alongside Reagan.
Are people feeling better disposed towards Starmer following his international performances over the last week?
|  |
| |  |
| Starmer on 17:19 - Mar 3 with 1525 views | kentsouthampton |
On the opposite end of the spectrum Farage has just upended any hopes he ever had of being PM, no one is going to trust him with the countries security. |  | | |
| Starmer on 17:30 - Mar 3 with 1510 views | Southamptonfan |
I think Starmer has dealt with things well, in a calm, credible manner. He has seemingly navigated through the tensions between Trump and Zelenski with an impressive maturity. This certainly could improve his poll ratings.
But, despite what many think of Trump, he has set the ball rolling to end this war, only a few weeks / months into his presidency. If the war stops, (through bad intentions or not), then the deaths stop - that's a good thing, achieved by Trump, something no other leader could manage. Trump has certainly got the other world leaders off their assess to do something about stopping this war, and quickly. [Post edited 3 Mar 17:34]
| |
| |
| Starmer on 19:02 - Mar 3 with 1440 views | kingslandstand1 |
| Starmer on 17:30 - Mar 3 by Southamptonfan |
I think Starmer has dealt with things well, in a calm, credible manner. He has seemingly navigated through the tensions between Trump and Zelenski with an impressive maturity. This certainly could improve his poll ratings.
But, despite what many think of Trump, he has set the ball rolling to end this war, only a few weeks / months into his presidency. If the war stops, (through bad intentions or not), then the deaths stop - that's a good thing, achieved by Trump, something no other leader could manage. Trump has certainly got the other world leaders off their assess to do something about stopping this war, and quickly. [Post edited 3 Mar 17:34]
|
Well at least then he'll get the Nobel Peace Prize he's supposedly after! As well as a few trillion dollars woth of Ukrainian minerals no doubt!
But if it does stop the war then it has to be a price to pay, although can we trust Putin to pi55 off and stop playing silly bug gers elsewhere as his standing in Russia (depending on what's in it for him) may go down a few grades |  | | |
| Starmer on 19:37 - Mar 3 with 1401 views | Bazza |
| Starmer on 17:19 - Mar 3 by kentsouthampton |
On the opposite end of the spectrum Farage has just upended any hopes he ever had of being PM, no one is going to trust him with the countries security. |
Please explain | | | |
| Starmer on 22:12 - Mar 3 with 1314 views | Joiedevivre |
| Starmer on 19:37 - Mar 3 by Bazza |
Please explain |
Something something Russia wants to take over the word, NATO had nothing to do with the current war, don’t question who’s been buying up Ukrainian farmland, send your kids to fight for a country ranked 105th in Global Corruption index using WW2 as the blueprint (only 100m deaths) this time with nuclear weapons, don’t focus on China…
Approval rating up? |  | | |
| Starmer on 22:24 - Mar 3 with 1291 views | UTS1885 |
Everyone wants the war to stop, however you dont rollover and allow Putin to invade Ukraine and let him get away with it. Fanta Fuhrer wants a ceasefire solely because he wants to due financial business with russia. Trump is only interested in money and when Russia invaded ukraine he said Putin was 'genius'. |  | | |
| Starmer on 22:51 - Mar 3 with 1265 views | Joiedevivre |
| Starmer on 22:24 - Mar 3 by UTS1885 |
Everyone wants the war to stop, however you dont rollover and allow Putin to invade Ukraine and let him get away with it. Fanta Fuhrer wants a ceasefire solely because he wants to due financial business with russia. Trump is only interested in money and when Russia invaded ukraine he said Putin was 'genius'. |
Not everyone wants this war to stop! And every US president heretofore, Biden and Trump, wanted [or wants] money out of it - to suggest Trump is an outlier is absurd. | | | |
| Starmer on 23:15 - Mar 3 with 1239 views | DorsetIan |
| Starmer on 22:51 - Mar 3 by Joiedevivre |
Not everyone wants this war to stop! And every US president heretofore, Biden and Trump, wanted [or wants] money out of it - to suggest Trump is an outlier is absurd. |
Fools like you and Trump see no value in democracy and no danger in appeasing homicidal psychopathic imperialists like Putin.
As if the last 100 years of European history has taught you nothing.
Russia propaganda has infiltrated to the heart of US politics and particularly MAGA and its take over of the Republican Party.
Thankfully it's reached only a few crackpots here: Bev Turner on GB News referring to the invasion as Russian's 'special military operation'. WTF!? Lord Haw-Haw eat your f*cking heart out. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Starmer on 23:24 - Mar 3 with 1225 views | Heisenberg |
No doubt Starmer will land himself a lucrative job on the international stage once he’s done with being PM but his attacks on working people and his continued belief on growth and the free markets solving everything will be his legacy. Add to that his total silence on the genocide in Gaza and his purge on free speech within the Labour Party and on wider issues he’s up there with Blair and his mate Mandelson. Deep down they hate the traditional left more than the right. |  |
| |
| Starmer on 23:29 - Mar 3 with 1218 views | Joiedevivre |
| Starmer on 23:15 - Mar 3 by DorsetIan |
Fools like you and Trump see no value in democracy and no danger in appeasing homicidal psychopathic imperialists like Putin.
As if the last 100 years of European history has taught you nothing.
Russia propaganda has infiltrated to the heart of US politics and particularly MAGA and its take over of the Republican Party.
Thankfully it's reached only a few crackpots here: Bev Turner on GB News referring to the invasion as Russian's 'special military operation'. WTF!? Lord Haw-Haw eat your f*cking heart out. |
Yet you, in the first sentence, seem to equate Ukraine and Democracy in the same breathe. Yet i’m the fool!
If you think this war is a fight for democracy then you’re long ago lost. We can only hope the Blairite war-mongering ‘coalition of the willing’ Labour party doesn’t send our lot in.
I do find it odd that the reasons for this war are so well understood and accepted within academia, but within the general public and the BBC, and through major politicians, Tory and Labour, it’s alien. In its place is a dichotomy of good vs evil. Much like the populist ideal of the “pure people” vs the “corrupt elite”, this time in foreign affairs. [Post edited 3 Mar 23:33]
| | | |
| Starmer on 23:53 - Mar 3 with 1179 views | DorsetIan |
| Starmer on 23:29 - Mar 3 by Joiedevivre |
Yet you, in the first sentence, seem to equate Ukraine and Democracy in the same breathe. Yet i’m the fool!
If you think this war is a fight for democracy then you’re long ago lost. We can only hope the Blairite war-mongering ‘coalition of the willing’ Labour party doesn’t send our lot in.
I do find it odd that the reasons for this war are so well understood and accepted within academia, but within the general public and the BBC, and through major politicians, Tory and Labour, it’s alien. In its place is a dichotomy of good vs evil. Much like the populist ideal of the “pure people” vs the “corrupt elite”, this time in foreign affairs. [Post edited 3 Mar 23:33]
|
Yes, you clearly are a fool.
Like Trump. Like Bev Turner. | |
| |
| Starmer on 23:58 - Mar 3 with 1173 views | Joiedevivre |
| Starmer on 23:53 - Mar 3 by DorsetIan |
Yes, you clearly are a fool.
Like Trump. Like Bev Turner. |
Great discussion, Ian. Great points made. Calling me a fool and equating me with people I dislike almost made me change my mind. Alas, no. | | | |
| Starmer on 05:36 - Mar 4 with 1077 views | saintmark1976 |
| Starmer on 23:29 - Mar 3 by Joiedevivre |
Yet you, in the first sentence, seem to equate Ukraine and Democracy in the same breathe. Yet i’m the fool!
If you think this war is a fight for democracy then you’re long ago lost. We can only hope the Blairite war-mongering ‘coalition of the willing’ Labour party doesn’t send our lot in.
I do find it odd that the reasons for this war are so well understood and accepted within academia, but within the general public and the BBC, and through major politicians, Tory and Labour, it’s alien. In its place is a dichotomy of good vs evil. Much like the populist ideal of the “pure people” vs the “corrupt elite”, this time in foreign affairs. [Post edited 3 Mar 23:33]
|
“ I do find it odd that the reasons for this war are so well understood and accepted within academia”
Joiedevivre, for the benefit of the uninitiated ( myself included ) perhaps you can spare the time to elaborate further by explaining exactly the reasons, acceptance and understanding to which you refer ? | |
| |
| Starmer on 07:36 - Mar 4 with 1013 views | cocklebreath |
| Starmer on 23:29 - Mar 3 by Joiedevivre |
Yet you, in the first sentence, seem to equate Ukraine and Democracy in the same breathe. Yet i’m the fool!
If you think this war is a fight for democracy then you’re long ago lost. We can only hope the Blairite war-mongering ‘coalition of the willing’ Labour party doesn’t send our lot in.
I do find it odd that the reasons for this war are so well understood and accepted within academia, but within the general public and the BBC, and through major politicians, Tory and Labour, it’s alien. In its place is a dichotomy of good vs evil. Much like the populist ideal of the “pure people” vs the “corrupt elite”, this time in foreign affairs. [Post edited 3 Mar 23:33]
|
The trump apologists are very convincing |  |
| |
| Starmer on 08:19 - Mar 4 with 977 views | kentsouthampton |
| Starmer on 19:37 - Mar 3 by Bazza |
Please explain |
80% of Brits hate Trump, Farage is Trumps arse licker, go figure. | | | |
| Starmer on 08:25 - Mar 4 with 963 views | kentsouthampton |
| Starmer on 22:12 - Mar 3 by Joiedevivre |
Something something Russia wants to take over the word, NATO had nothing to do with the current war, don’t question who’s been buying up Ukrainian farmland, send your kids to fight for a country ranked 105th in Global Corruption index using WW2 as the blueprint (only 100m deaths) this time with nuclear weapons, don’t focus on China…
Approval rating up? |
And Andrew Tate is persecuted by the Matrix, the lizard people rule us and the moon is made of cheese. | | | |
| Starmer on 08:31 - Mar 4 with 949 views | Joiedevivre |
| Starmer on 05:36 - Mar 4 by saintmark1976 |
“ I do find it odd that the reasons for this war are so well understood and accepted within academia”
Joiedevivre, for the benefit of the uninitiated ( myself included ) perhaps you can spare the time to elaborate further by explaining exactly the reasons, acceptance and understanding to which you refer ? |
The area I refer to here is the United States’- through NATO- aggressive nature towards Russia from the 1990s onwards, at a time when even Russia was pro-West under Yeltsin. Yeltsin at the time wished to even join NATO but Clinton’s administration said no. Mentioned in the majority of journal articles is NATO enlargement playing a major role; Gorbachev upon the reunification of Germany asked, and was promised no NATO enlargement to the East as a condition https://natowatch.org/newsbriefs/2018/how-gorbachev-was-misled-over-assurances-a
During the same 1990s, Russia was, while internally falling apart, looking for multipolar relations; they were so poor essentially they wanted to cling onto their “prestige.” Hence why they supported the West in most endeavours until NATO expansion caused doubt. Russia then ditched ideas of new friends and went towards old ones - namely Cuba, North Korea and Libya.
The Wolfowitz Doctrine of 1994-1999 was followed. Essentially, the West must remain hostile to the fallen “Soviet Union”. Hence why NATO - a creation based on Soviet aggression and the Berlin blockade was not disbanded with the fall of the Soviet Union but expanded. 12 Eastern European nations joined NATO between this time and 2014 to go against Russia. The literature on this makes key to mention this in the majority of the papers I read when writing my report on the subject. Putin’s Munich 2007 speech is highlighted by most: NATOs army must not continue to expand eastward or we will invade Ukraine, yet a year later Bush (2008) is calling for Ukraine and Georgia to join Nato. I’d liken this to Scotland leaving the UK in the 1960s and joining the Warsaw pact, with weapons on Englands doorstep.
the psyche of Russia is geared towards paranoia and securitisation. It’s why they like a seemingly Macho leader. They are not a large power economically, yet still act like one - after all, they’ve been invaded a myriad of times specifically through Ukraine.
Geopolitics also comes into this. If Ukraine were, as the U.S. president at the time wanted, to join NATO, this would allow for NATO access to the Sevastopol naval base and the Black Sea at a time when Russia wished to build up their Black Sea fleet (they had a deal with Ukraine: cheap oil and gas for the base).
Now of course there are many reasons why the invasion happened and of course Putin shouldn’t have invaded. I haven’t begun to go into 2014 or the Eurasian Economic Community. But my main emphasis was on NATO being a big part in aggravating tensions from Yeltsin onwards. The most famous foreign policy analysis saying this is John J Mearsheimer, but there’s many more if you search on Jstor or other websites.
Even saying this in the House of Commons would allow for a return of phlegm-inducing hatred. [Post edited 4 Mar 8:33]
| | | |
| Starmer on 08:32 - Mar 4 with 941 views | kentsouthampton |
| Starmer on 23:15 - Mar 3 by DorsetIan |
Fools like you and Trump see no value in democracy and no danger in appeasing homicidal psychopathic imperialists like Putin.
As if the last 100 years of European history has taught you nothing.
Russia propaganda has infiltrated to the heart of US politics and particularly MAGA and its take over of the Republican Party.
Thankfully it's reached only a few crackpots here: Bev Turner on GB News referring to the invasion as Russian's 'special military operation'. WTF!? Lord Haw-Haw eat your f*cking heart out. |
Spot on, how fuçking stupid do you have to be to not realise Putin wants to restore imperial Russia’s old boundaries. Putin invaded Ukraine a sovereign country, the same fuçking morons who thought it was an outrage to our sovereignty to share cheese regulations with the EU now think it's OK to carve up Ukraine. You couldn’t make it up, wänkers. | | | |
| Starmer on 08:34 - Mar 4 with 932 views | DorsetIan |
| Starmer on 23:58 - Mar 3 by Joiedevivre |
Great discussion, Ian. Great points made. Calling me a fool and equating me with people I dislike almost made me change my mind. Alas, no. |
Need at least some common ground for a discussion. If you can’t see Putin for what he is, there is
none.
Go share your nonsense with our friends in the Baltic States. | |
| |
| Starmer on 08:49 - Mar 4 with 881 views | kentsouthampton |
| Starmer on 08:31 - Mar 4 by Joiedevivre |
The area I refer to here is the United States’- through NATO- aggressive nature towards Russia from the 1990s onwards, at a time when even Russia was pro-West under Yeltsin. Yeltsin at the time wished to even join NATO but Clinton’s administration said no. Mentioned in the majority of journal articles is NATO enlargement playing a major role; Gorbachev upon the reunification of Germany asked, and was promised no NATO enlargement to the East as a condition https://natowatch.org/newsbriefs/2018/how-gorbachev-was-misled-over-assurances-a
During the same 1990s, Russia was, while internally falling apart, looking for multipolar relations; they were so poor essentially they wanted to cling onto their “prestige.” Hence why they supported the West in most endeavours until NATO expansion caused doubt. Russia then ditched ideas of new friends and went towards old ones - namely Cuba, North Korea and Libya.
The Wolfowitz Doctrine of 1994-1999 was followed. Essentially, the West must remain hostile to the fallen “Soviet Union”. Hence why NATO - a creation based on Soviet aggression and the Berlin blockade was not disbanded with the fall of the Soviet Union but expanded. 12 Eastern European nations joined NATO between this time and 2014 to go against Russia. The literature on this makes key to mention this in the majority of the papers I read when writing my report on the subject. Putin’s Munich 2007 speech is highlighted by most: NATOs army must not continue to expand eastward or we will invade Ukraine, yet a year later Bush (2008) is calling for Ukraine and Georgia to join Nato. I’d liken this to Scotland leaving the UK in the 1960s and joining the Warsaw pact, with weapons on Englands doorstep.
the psyche of Russia is geared towards paranoia and securitisation. It’s why they like a seemingly Macho leader. They are not a large power economically, yet still act like one - after all, they’ve been invaded a myriad of times specifically through Ukraine.
Geopolitics also comes into this. If Ukraine were, as the U.S. president at the time wanted, to join NATO, this would allow for NATO access to the Sevastopol naval base and the Black Sea at a time when Russia wished to build up their Black Sea fleet (they had a deal with Ukraine: cheap oil and gas for the base).
Now of course there are many reasons why the invasion happened and of course Putin shouldn’t have invaded. I haven’t begun to go into 2014 or the Eurasian Economic Community. But my main emphasis was on NATO being a big part in aggravating tensions from Yeltsin onwards. The most famous foreign policy analysis saying this is John J Mearsheimer, but there’s many more if you search on Jstor or other websites.
Even saying this in the House of Commons would allow for a return of phlegm-inducing hatred. [Post edited 4 Mar 8:33]
|
 | | | |
| Starmer on 09:05 - Mar 4 with 849 views | Joiedevivre |
| Starmer on 08:34 - Mar 4 by DorsetIan |
Need at least some common ground for a discussion. If you can’t see Putin for what he is, there is
none.
Go share your nonsense with our friends in the Baltic States. |
But I dislike Putin: a dictator whose army has committed war crimes. I merely disagree with the narrative of how the war began and want peace to stop the millions dying out there. | | | |
| Starmer on 09:20 - Mar 4 with 795 views | kentsouthampton |
| Starmer on 09:05 - Mar 4 by Joiedevivre |
But I dislike Putin: a dictator whose army has committed war crimes. I merely disagree with the narrative of how the war began and want peace to stop the millions dying out there. |
Ukraine are defending themselves, Russia is the aggressor what don't you get about that, are you really that fuçking stupid?
There's nothing else too it, it's that fuçking simple, a bit like you. | | | |
| Starmer on 09:22 - Mar 4 with 789 views | jopreston |
I find threads like this a bit distressing. I mean, is this what has become of us? Has the age of debate come and gone to the degree now that name calling lords it over sensible debate and acceptance of differing opinion? Very sad to see. | | | |
| Starmer on 09:23 - Mar 4 with 780 views | kentsouthampton |
Putin's bitches still at it.
| | | |
| Starmer on 09:23 - Mar 4 with 781 views | Joiedevivre |
| Starmer on 09:20 - Mar 4 by kentsouthampton |
Ukraine are defending themselves, Russia is the aggressor what don't you get about that, are you really that fuçking stupid?
There's nothing else too it, it's that fuçking simple, a bit like you. |
Sir, you literally have zero arguing points. It’s just abuse after abuse. I don’t see you as stupid for having a differing opinion. But it’s tiring. Have a good day. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
