| Hypothetically speaking 10:31 - Feb 22 with 18206 views | blueasfook |
On the remote chance that labour had won the election...
I wonder what noises Comrade Corbyn would be making to the Russians over their illegal invasion of Ukraine.
He would probably side with them and wish them well. |  |
| |  |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:36 - Feb 22 with 1542 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Hypothetically speaking on 10:53 - Feb 22 by Steve_M |
I'll go for about five pages before the thread gets pulled....
Given Seumus Milne's consistent Putin-apologism and the instinctive anti-Western views of the one-time Dear Leader then I imagine we would be seeing government statements along the same lines as the 'both-siding' and blaming of NATO emanating from Corbyn & Abbott over the last week.
The 2019 election was a truly dreadful choice between two men unfit, each for a multitude of reasons, to be Prime Minister. At least the Labour Party is rectifying that now, the Tories rather less so. |
He also of course condemned the violence “on both sides” in Venezuela which was also pretty unsavoury.
That said I’m not sure this thread needed to be done, it’s a little unnecessary - Corbyn is an irrelevance now, so it just seems like the comment was to provoke a reaction from certain posters. |  | | |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:37 - Feb 22 with 1534 views | blueasfook |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:32 - Feb 22 by Darth_Koont |
It wasn’t for “humanitarian reasons” just like Putin’s silly claim?
We don’t walk the walk. And it’s noticeable that our response has been more around militarisation in the name of “defence” than actual peace-keeping and negotiation.
We have to be a lot better or we enable even worse actors like Putin to justify their actions on far too similar grounds. Just because our interventions and invasions are far away and against brown people doesn’t actually make them “better”. |
Now you're just being silly. Danno has resoundingly destroyed your argument. Now you're trying to make it racially motivated? That's pathetic. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:38 - Feb 22 with 1536 views | chicoazul |
This seems to imply that the Maximum Leader would have been a friend or in favour of the current Russian regime.
People *do know* the USSR collapsed 30 years ago and Putin, while a sinister despot, is definitively not a commie or even a Marxist in any way whatsoever, right? |  |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:38 - Feb 22 with 1530 views | Darth_Koont |
| Hypothetically speaking on 12:19 - Feb 22 by GlasgowBlue |
Fcuk me. You have Israel Tourette’s don’t you? |
It’s a shameful situation actively aided and abetted by UK foreign policy.
I included Saudi Arabia (with the Yemen but also their own human rights record) because that’s also the same situation.
These are strategic alliances in our name. What do you think I should be talking about? The Uyghurs? Assad? |  |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:42 - Feb 22 with 1521 views | Darth_Koont |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:37 - Feb 22 by blueasfook |
Now you're just being silly. Danno has resoundingly destroyed your argument. Now you're trying to make it racially motivated? That's pathetic. |
Gmpf.
I think you’d struggle to be the judge in an arse vs elbow contest. Let alone who has “won” a more complex discussion where people have very different perspectives. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:43 - Feb 22 with 1504 views | chicoazul |
| Hypothetically speaking on 11:49 - Feb 22 by DanTheMan |
This is pure whataboutism though, it has nothing to do with the situation in Ukraine. What Russia is doing in Ukraine right now is wrong and we would be right to sanction them for trying for quite literally invading a country.
If it was us doing something similar I'd be furious. Putin's reasoning given last night was shockingly similar to Hitler's reasoning for taking the Sudentenland, and I'm not exaggerating there.
We can be wrong about things and so can they. The default of "west wrong" is no better than "west right". |
This is not directed at you but I truly hate the criticism of “whatabouterry” on here that labels it as rubbish. Tu quoque is an excellent way to present arguments. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:44 - Feb 22 with 1497 views | blueasfook |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:42 - Feb 22 by Darth_Koont |
Gmpf.
I think you’d struggle to be the judge in an arse vs elbow contest. Let alone who has “won” a more complex discussion where people have very different perspectives. |
Wow, that's a grown up response. Well done. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:46 - Feb 22 with 1479 views | Darth_Koont |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:44 - Feb 22 by blueasfook |
Wow, that's a grown up response. Well done. |
As if I’m talking to a real person rather than a disingenuous troll ... | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:49 - Feb 22 with 1460 views | blueasfook |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:46 - Feb 22 by Darth_Koont |
As if I’m talking to a real person rather than a disingenuous troll ... |
Oh the old "he doesn't say things I like so he's a troll"
Happy to engage with you and discuss, but your last few posts have just been insults. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:50 - Feb 22 with 1460 views | BlueBadger |
I understand that Boris is planning on getting tough with Putin now and saying that if he doesn't behave, he'll be forced to stop accepting donations to the Tory party from him. |  |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:53 - Feb 22 with 1448 views | SaleAway |
| Hypothetically speaking on 11:49 - Feb 22 by DanTheMan |
This is pure whataboutism though, it has nothing to do with the situation in Ukraine. What Russia is doing in Ukraine right now is wrong and we would be right to sanction them for trying for quite literally invading a country.
If it was us doing something similar I'd be furious. Putin's reasoning given last night was shockingly similar to Hitler's reasoning for taking the Sudentenland, and I'm not exaggerating there.
We can be wrong about things and so can they. The default of "west wrong" is no better than "west right". |
Don't you go bringing nuance to an internet argument ... | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:59 - Feb 22 with 1432 views | WeWereZombies |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:46 - Feb 22 by Darth_Koont |
As if I’m talking to a real person rather than a disingenuous troll ... |
Nothing to do with this thread, but whilst you are online Darth - have you noticed that Jermaine Wright's son, Drey, has had a couple of appearances off the bench recently for your Hibbies? |  |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:18 - Feb 22 with 1412 views | BlueNomad |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:38 - Feb 22 by chicoazul |
This seems to imply that the Maximum Leader would have been a friend or in favour of the current Russian regime.
People *do know* the USSR collapsed 30 years ago and Putin, while a sinister despot, is definitively not a commie or even a Marxist in any way whatsoever, right? |
I tried to make this point earlier. It really is strange that people associate modern Russia with communism. I'm sure there are many posters (possibly on this thread) who weren't even around when the Soviet Union collapsed. |  | | |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:25 - Feb 22 with 1400 views | Mullet |
| Hypothetically speaking on 11:06 - Feb 22 by noggin |
"Corbyn was weak on defence"
Defence against what? |
The Tories |  |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:34 - Feb 22 with 1390 views | DanTheMan |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:18 - Feb 22 by BlueNomad |
I tried to make this point earlier. It really is strange that people associate modern Russia with communism. I'm sure there are many posters (possibly on this thread) who weren't even around when the Soviet Union collapsed. |
I may be reading this wrong but I think Chico was being sarcastic. |  |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:37 - Feb 22 with 1383 views | giant_stow |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:25 - Feb 22 by Mullet |
The Tories |
tinker! |  |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:41 - Feb 22 with 1373 views | Mullet |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:37 - Feb 22 by giant_stow |
tinker! |
What? He didn't just lose to the worst government we've had but lost in the most comprehensive manner possible, gifting our country to tax-dodging, corruption loving far right sh1theads to wreak generations of damage.
Hopefully Starmer is more McKenna to Jezza's Cook as it were. Burnham will be a good follow on too. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:47 - Feb 22 with 1344 views | giant_stow |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:41 - Feb 22 by Mullet |
What? He didn't just lose to the worst government we've had but lost in the most comprehensive manner possible, gifting our country to tax-dodging, corruption loving far right sh1theads to wreak generations of damage.
Hopefully Starmer is more McKenna to Jezza's Cook as it were. Burnham will be a good follow on too. |
I agree mr - just noting your sarc! | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:47 - Feb 22 with 1343 views | blueasfook |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:41 - Feb 22 by Mullet |
What? He didn't just lose to the worst government we've had but lost in the most comprehensive manner possible, gifting our country to tax-dodging, corruption loving far right sh1theads to wreak generations of damage.
Hopefully Starmer is more McKenna to Jezza's Cook as it were. Burnham will be a good follow on too. |
I've heard grumblings that not all in Manchester are happy with some of Burnham's mayoral policies. Is this true?
But then, as the old adage goes, you can't please everyone | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:50 - Feb 22 with 1325 views | Mullet |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:47 - Feb 22 by blueasfook |
I've heard grumblings that not all in Manchester are happy with some of Burnham's mayoral policies. Is this true?
But then, as the old adage goes, you can't please everyone |
Most of the criticism comes from trolls online and idiots parroting their guff to be honest. The MEN is another regional paper aping the Mail to get ad revenue, so their coverage encourages it too. He's not perfect, but he is like Sadiq Khan enough of all the right things to worry Tories and the like.
So that's a good thing. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 16:31 - Feb 22 with 1262 views | Darth_Koont |
| Hypothetically speaking on 13:59 - Feb 22 by WeWereZombies |
Nothing to do with this thread, but whilst you are online Darth - have you noticed that Jermaine Wright's son, Drey, has had a couple of appearances off the bench recently for your Hibbies? |
No, I missed that entirely.
Thanks for that. I’ll take a look. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 17:04 - Feb 22 with 1214 views | MattinLondon |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:41 - Feb 22 by Mullet |
What? He didn't just lose to the worst government we've had but lost in the most comprehensive manner possible, gifting our country to tax-dodging, corruption loving far right sh1theads to wreak generations of damage.
Hopefully Starmer is more McKenna to Jezza's Cook as it were. Burnham will be a good follow on too. |
What I found very odd was that at the last election Corbyn’s supporters seemed to be extremely happy that they lost. Congratulating themselves on not being totally humiliated but doing a tad better than what was forecast.
The fact that they lost seemed to have meant nothing. |  | | |
| Hypothetically speaking on 17:08 - Feb 22 with 1193 views | Mullet |
| Hypothetically speaking on 17:04 - Feb 22 by MattinLondon |
What I found very odd was that at the last election Corbyn’s supporters seemed to be extremely happy that they lost. Congratulating themselves on not being totally humiliated but doing a tad better than what was forecast.
The fact that they lost seemed to have meant nothing. |
I dunno if it's denial? Maybe it's this idea they "won" and Labour as a whole didn't as they seem intent on separatism on zealotry above all else. The fact they've handed the keys to the country to the Far Right and keep on assisting them seems totally glossed over or missed. It's hard to tell given how removed from the real world/politically illiterate they seem to be. | |
| |
| Hypothetically speaking on 17:10 - Feb 22 with 1187 views | noggin |
| Hypothetically speaking on 14:41 - Feb 22 by Mullet |
What? He didn't just lose to the worst government we've had but lost in the most comprehensive manner possible, gifting our country to tax-dodging, corruption loving far right sh1theads to wreak generations of damage.
Hopefully Starmer is more McKenna to Jezza's Cook as it were. Burnham will be a good follow on too. |
I prefer to blame those who voted for the tories, rather than the opposition. The Conservative Party was not the only alternative for those who were so easily duped into distrusting Corbyn. [Post edited 22 Feb 2022 17:13]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
