Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[mrsblue]

The biggest U-turn of the week was undoubtley the Tories (correct) decision to pull out of building that prison for the Saudis.

The way we cosy up to Saudi Arabia is a national disgrace.

How come none of the Kippers on here want to talk about that? :unsure:

Saudi put billions into our economy every year,without their cash we could be in poo poo.

 

[superblue24]

The biggest U-turn of the week was undoubtley the Tories (correct) decision to pull out of building that prison for the Saudis.

The way we cosy up to Saudi Arabia is a national disgrace.

How come none of the Kippers on here want to talk about that? :unsure:

Umm, didn't I do that just yesterday?

Because Cameron is in a position of power as the prime minister and needs to forge the right global partnership dynamics for the good of national security, whereas Corbyn is a nobody with no influence beyond the British bedwetters and chooses to mingle with the "wrong sorts" out of choice and poor social taste.

Things have changed in recent times where it is now more important to fight pockets of terrorism mostly associated with religion instead of good ol' fashioned "two countries in conflict" and to do this we need to get the nod from the country's leader. This means we enter into arms deals we ordinarily would have zero interest in, in order to get approval to bomb their country and gain intelligence.

Rather this than have more innocent heads chopped off.

 

[mrsblue]

PM's questions so far.

Jezza...Kelly asked.
Jezza...Matthew asked.

Joker.

 

[rigsby]

Oh do me a favour, that was 70 years ago. In 2015, Saudi Arabia crucifies, beheads, delimbs and wants to apply 360 lashes 76 year old men who (stupidly) make some wine for their own consumption. We're all rightly quick to condemn and drop bombs on ISIS for doing the same, but because they've got a bit of oil & money we turn a blind eye to it?

He has lived there 25 years, so he clearly knows the rules on alcohol. As most of us do even if we have never set foot in Arabia. By the way he won't be flogged British navy style with a cat o nine tails. I am told by someone who lived there that the person issuing the punishment has a Koran under their arm whilst administering the lashes. So its more of a humiliation than a whipping.

 

[Benfleet A1]

Oh do me a favour, that was 70 years ago. In 2015, Saudi Arabia crucifies, beheads, delimbs and wants to apply 360 lashes 76 year old men who (stupidly) make some wine for their own consumption. We're all rightly quick to condemn and drop bombs on ISIS for doing the same, but because they've got a bit of oil & money we turn a blind eye to it?

Nah, you do me a favour, for all your bluster and bollocks about what's right and wrong you will still buy Saudi produced fuel for your car and Chinese produced toys for your child so your morals are no better than mine. Boycott those products if it makes you feel happy and warm inside, see how far you get without them.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Umm, didn't I do that just yesterday?

So you did,indirectly.Didn't see the words U-turn or Saudi prison deal scrapped, in what you wrote though.

Saudi put billions into our economy every year,without their cash we could be in poo poo.

So it's quite Ok if we cozy up to them then? No such thing as an "ethical foreign policy" with the Tories?

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

They should have all there cars that they park all over London on double yellow lines clamped towed away and fined like anyone else .:angry:

If it's Saudi officials their illegally parked cars should be stoned

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Nah, you do me a favour, for all your bluster and bollocks about what's right and wrong you will still buy Saudi produced fuel for your car and Chinese produced toys for your child so your morals are no better than mine. Boycott those products if it makes you feel happy and warm inside, see how far you get without them.

Bit different from selling them arms.

 

[mrsblue]

Bit different from selling them arms.

They will buy arms from somewhere,might as well be us.

 

[mrsblue]

Oh do me a favour, that was 70 years ago. In 2015, Saudi Arabia crucifies, beheads, delimbs and wants to apply 360 lashes 76 year old men who (stupidly) make some wine for their own consumption. We're all rightly quick to condemn and drop bombs on ISIS for doing the same, but because they've got a bit of oil & money we turn a blind eye to it?

I think the most interesting factor is this old guy hasn't lived here for 25 year's yet wants Cameron to intervene in order he can come home !

Obey those rules!

 

[Benfleet A1]

Bit different from selling them arms.

But exactly the same principle. Like it or not, they are an allie and have been for a long time. Barbaric and stuck in the dark ages with their ideas of law and order but allied none the less.

 

[callan]

So you did,indirectly.Didn't see the words U-turn or Saudi prison deal scrapped, in what you wrote though.



So it's quite Ok if we cozy up to them then? No such thing as an "ethical foreign policy" with the Tories?

Was there with the last Labour government?

 

[MK Shrimper]

Was there with the last Labour government?

Sadly not. Lot of blood on Blair & Brown's hands.

 

[londonblue]

Was there with the last Labour government?

Sadly not. Lot of blood on Blair & Brown's hands.

In fairness I don't think there has ever been such a thing because I don't think it is possible. And in fairness to Blair he appointed Robin Cook who wanted to bring an "ethical dimension" to the role. He failed because what is right for one person is wrong for another.

It is simply impossible for there to be such a thing as an ethical foreign policy. You can't please all of the people all of the time.

 

[MK Shrimper]

In fairness I don't think there has ever been such a thing because I don't think it is possible. And in fairness to Blair he appointed Robin Cook who wanted to bring an "ethical dimension" to the role. He failed because what is right for one person is wrong for another.

It is simply impossible for there to be such a thing as an ethical foreign policy. You can't please all of the people all of the time.

Disagree. There are plenty of countries out there with horrendous human rights records that you can refuse to trade with.

 

[londonblue]

Disagree. There are plenty of countries out there with horrendous human rights records that you can refuse to trade with.

But that doesn't cover an entire foreign policy. And who's to say one country is any better than another? To us Saudi Arabia's laws are archaic at best and barbaric at worst. However, they are based on the country's religious beliefs and are culturally ingrained. Does that make them right? Not in my opinion. But in other peoples it doesn't make them wrong either. For me, what would tip the balance is if they were sponsoring terrorism. If they were, that would be a different issue altogether.

Also, carrying on the Robin Cook example. We still went to war in Kosovo. Was it the right thing to do? I would say yes, but it wasn't sanctioned by the UN...so was it ethical or not? That depends on your standpoint. As I said, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

And what is also interesting is that most of the countries with awful human rights records are members of the UN Human Rights Council.

 

[rigsby]

But that doesn't cover an entire foreign policy. And who's to say one country is any better than another? To us Saudi Arabia's laws are archaic at best and barbaric at worst. However, they are based on the county's religious beliefs and are culturally ingrained. Does that make them right? Not in my opinion. But in other peoples' it doesn't make them wrong either. For me, what would tip the balance is if they were sponsoring terrorism. If they were, that would be a different issue altogether.

Also, carrying on the Robin Cook example. We still went to war in Kosovo. Was it the right thing to do? I would say yes, but it wasn't sanctioned by the UN...so was it ethical or not? That depends on your standpoint. As I said, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

And what is also interesting is that most of the countries with awful human rights records are members of the UN Human Rights Council.

The best solution would be a return to the 19th century when us British did what was best for the world. Ok they never had much of a say in things but overall they were much better off.

We should start by retaking control of FIFA and have the world cup in Britain. With some new directives about diving, shirt pulling time wasting and allow a few more Deegan style tackles. We could show the world how much better things would be if only they were to see sense and let us govern the world once again.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Disagree. There are plenty of countries out there with horrendous human rights records that you can refuse to trade with.

Okay, lets start with most of Africa. I wonder who would suffer out of this ethical approach?

 

[RHB]

The best solution would be a return to the 19th century when us British did what was best for the world. Ok they never had much of a say in things but overall they were much better off.

We should start by retaking control of FIFA and have the world cup in Britain. With some new directives about diving, shirt pulling time wasting and allow a few more Deegan style tackles. We could show the world how much better things would be if only they were to see sense and let us govern the world once again.

Call me Dave, Boy George, Boris and Theresa May governing the world? hmmm...........scary!!

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

But that doesn't cover an entire foreign policy. And who's to say one country is any better than another? To us Saudi Arabia's laws are archaic at best and barbaric at worst. However, they are based on the county's religious beliefs and are culturally ingrained. Does that make them right? Not in my opinion. But in other peoples it doesn't make them wrong either. For me, what would tip the balance is if they were sponsoring terrorism. If they were, that would be a different issue altogether.

Also, carrying on the Robin Cook example. We still went to war in Kosovo. Was it the right thing to do? I would say yes, but it wasn't sanctioned by the UN...so was it ethical or not? That depends on your standpoint. As I said, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

And what is also interesting is that most of the countries with awful human rights records are members of the UN Human Rights Council.

Excellent post. One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter etc mind. Not exactly state supported but the States turned a blind eye for years to the activities of NORAID and they are one of our biggest investors as are we to them.