Post here if the site is dead.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

(note that Liberal = Conservative)

in the Uk , Labour=Conservative too  . that's why so many of us got sick of voting.
To everybody's surprise we now have an actual Sociallist  leading the labour party, but most of  the Labour MPs and councillors are still Tories wearing  red ties.  He's got a long way to go, before reforming the party back into what it's supposed to be.

Labour has never been this extreme. This lot are bad for democracy. I'd vote for a centre-left Labour party but not these nutcases. A bit like how a minarchist Tory party would be dangerous. They're bullies who threaten the state.

What's bad for democracy is effectively only having a choice between two flavours of conservative. We saw how that turned out in the US, Trump vs HRC. And two flavours of conservative is all you've had for a long time in the UK.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

(note that Liberal = Conservative)

in the Uk , Labour=Conservative too  . that's why so many of us got sick of voting.
To everybody's surprise we now have an actual Sociallist  leading the labour party, but most of  the Labour MPs and councillors are still Tories wearing  red ties.  He's got a long way to go, before reforming the party back into what it's supposed to be.

Here Liberal is the officially conservative party. Labor here is nominally centre left but in practice centre right.

I lived in the UK for 2 years under Tony Blair and the nonsensical "third way" (supposedly an alternative to the traditional left-right dichotomy). Of course there never was a third way other than Thatcherism dressed up with rhetoric that painted it as being for the good of all. I agree, Labour in the UK are mostly a bunch of Tories in red ties. Worse than our Labor.

[Tequila]

(note that Liberal = Conservative)

in the Uk , Labour=Conservative too  . that's why so many of us got sick of voting.
To everybody's surprise we now have an actual Sociallist  leading the labour party, but most of  the Labour MPs and councillors are still Tories wearing  red ties.  He's got a long way to go, before reforming the party back into what it's supposed to be.

Labour has never been this extreme. This lot are bad for democracy. I'd vote for a centre-left Labour party but not these nutcases. A bit like how a minarchist Tory party would be dangerous. They're bullies who threaten the state.

What's bad for democracy is effectively only having a choice between two flavours of conservative. We saw how that turned out in the US, Trump vs HRC. And two flavours of conservative is all you've had for a long time in the UK.

They threaten Britain. They want to give Northern Ireland and the Falkland Islands away against the wishes of those that live there.

We live in a fairly liberal country.

[Walkie]

They threaten Britain. They want to give Northern Ireland and the Falkland Islands away against the wishes of those that live there.

I guess you must be referring to this long-resolved storm-in--teacup : https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/85477/excl-labour-manifesto-will-pledge-defend-falklands. )I posted the most recent story I could find on it)  and "they"must mean Jeremy Corbyn , seeing as nobody else seems to be on record as expressing a view that could possibly be interpreted thus.

As for

Labour has never been this extreme.

I think you'll find that Labour was at it's most extreme during the post-war years when it introduced the NHS, state pensions, free schooling for all , social housing etc. ... almost all the things  that sucessive Tory and Blairite govenments alike have been gradually whittling to the bone and beyond, these past few decades. And the very insttutions that the rest of the world most admires us for, funnily enough.

A bit like how a minarchist Tory party would be dangerous. They're bullies who threaten the state.

it's really hard to see what policies such as  re-privatising British Industry,  reversing Austerity, and generally reviving that post-war labour ethos have in common with Tory minarchism . But don't worry.. Those are just  Corbynite  policies, and most of Labour is Blairite still, like I said. So most of  Labour will be fighting against those policies. as usual. Small chance of them actually happening.  It's just that a win for a Corbyn -led party might give us a bit of a chance.

Can't help wondering if you're getting your news and  views from the Sun, Daily Mail or somesuch.

[Tequila]

I guess you must be referring to this long-resolved storm-in--teacup : https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/85477/excl-labour-manifesto-will-pledge-defend-falklands. )I posted the most recent story I could find on it)  and "they"must mean Jeremy Corbyn , seeing as nobody else seems to be on record as expressing a view that could possibly be interpreted thus.

Corbyn was on Argentina's side in 1982, not Britain's. The then-Labour leader Michael Foot was very much on the UK's side. Corbyn was on the side of the political wing of the IRA throughout the Troubles. He could have supported the SDLP like most of Labour did throughout the Troubles, but he chose extremists. He got in trouble for supporting an extremist anti apartheid movement in the 1980s instead of the mainstresm one, which the mainstream disavowed. He is a genuine antisemite and terror supporter.

[Walkie]

oh?
 those are the facts are they?
and there was i thinking that corbyn had merely  objected to an international definition of ani-semitism which amounted to  "ÿou may  freely criticise any government on Earth, except for the government of Israel. " which objection kinda made him anti-semitic by definition , but somebody had to have the balls to say it, IMO. What next? You're Islamophobic if you criticise ISIS?
As for the rest, IMHO, he was just going round being a man of peace , just like he says he is.  If ypu want to try to resolve hostilities, then you have to be open to appreciating yopur enemy's POV. Cosying up to your mates might be a  safer option, from a PR perspective,   but it doesn't change a thing.
OH! and he doesn't think that Britain is above reproach either. He  openly recognises that our country has inflamed hostilities by behaving  pretty shamefully , eg by selling arms to Saudi Arabia. You might call that attitude "supporting terrorism ", but selling those arms looks much more like "supporting terrorism " to me.
Those are my opinions . Yours are evidently different, but reducing yours  to simple  bold statements doesn't make them any more factual than mine.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

Funny how the 9/11 attacks were funded and supported and organized out of Saudi Arabia, and carried out by Saudis, but Iraq and Afghanistan got invaded.  While the UK and US and other Western countries continue to sell advanced military equipment and turn a blind eye to atrocities that they commit. Something is not quite right about all of that.

[odeon]

They (the US and the UK) have always been very selective about the atrocities they choose to recognise. Saudi Arabia's too important to be criticised in earnest, and Israel is, well, Israel. If you utter a word about their current policies, you'll be accused of anti-semitism.

Also wondering about what the US hope to gain by their current warmongering against Iran. While Iran isn't your average typical peace-loving democracy, they did follow the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal. It was in their best interests. The US has yet to produce evidence of the contrary and most likely won't since they've moved on to further sanctions.

I guess Trump didn't fall in love with anyone in Iran.