Support NeoGAF

[crayman]

And yet, only 9 countries out of 195 have nuclear capability, are you saying that those 189 countries are at more risk because they have no nuclear weapons?

It's only 9 countries that could potentially nuke anyone, and fortunately many of them are rational actors who aren't prone to random aggression,.

Most of the at-risk countries that may be targeted by the less rational actors are covered by defence treaties (Eg. US would defend South Korea).

 

[Spaced Harrier]

Never forget you are the no. 5 or 6 economy in the whole world.

Homelessness, foodbanks, the disabled losing their entitlements. (Hate the word benefits) is wrong.

It's immoral.

It's unnecessary.

It's evil.

If a country as rich and powerful as you guys, can accept this, what is the point in society at all.


For all the talk, about brexit, Security, who is prime ministerial etc... who do you think would protect the vulnerable? Those who are truly fucked in life?

Is it Theresa May?

 

[danowat]

It's only 9 countries that could potentially nuke anyone, and fortunately many of them are rational actors who aren't prone to random aggression,.

Most of the at-risk countries that may be targeted by the less rational actors are covered by defence treaties (Eg. US would defend South Korea).

Really?, blimey.

 

[StayDead]

To commit to trident but never use it? A collosal waste of money?

His funding of the police forces and NHS, is it legitimately viable?

The welfare budget, I work my arse off 5 days a week but I believe benefits for those that are struggling are the best this country has ever had to offer, have labour commented on how they will fund it without cuts, cuts, cuts and keep those who need it from becoming poorer?

Those are the three defining questions in regards to my voting.

Hope you can help. Thanks.

All 4 of those things are explained IN DETAIL in the Manifesto.

 

[*Splinter]

To commit to trident but never use it? A collosal waste of money?

It's a waste of money to have it in the first place, but there's no real difference with any other party policy here. Everyone will keep it, no one will use it.

His funding of the police forces and NHS, is it legitimately viable?

Yes.

The welfare budget, I work my arse off 5 days a week but I believe benefits for those that are struggling are the best this country has ever had to offer, have labour commented on how they will fund it without cuts, cuts, cuts and keep those who need it from becoming poorer?

I think you are confused here. It's the Tories who will cut public services, Labour plan to increase taxes for the top 5% of earners (I think this is right, someone please correct me if not).

As for benefits... please watch this video. It is only 5 minutes long, and might give you an idea of what life is like for many of the less fortunate.

I "work my ass of 5 days a week" and will see approximately equal levels of success/wealth under any government.



I say all this as a Labour supporter. If anything has an unreasonable level of spin I'm sure someone else will challenge it.

 

[Spuck-uk]

Just on principal? I live in a Labour stronghold where they had 61% of the vote last time.

75% for Labour in my ward, with the next highest party being 8.5%

Stilll voting, always vote.

Probably the only area where the Liberal party (yes, they still exist), got more votes than the Lib Dems.

 

[HazySaiyan]

Saw this on my way to work this morning, somebody isn't happy:

Went and checked his record, yeah he is a bit of a cunt:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24944/craig_whittaker/calder_valley/votes

 

[Diancecht]

I just read up on the UK election rules. It appears that May only need around 16-20 votes for majority? Uh, that's so close for comfort. Would Labour and Con work together? Or SNP and Labour? I don't think SNP would form a government with May, right?

 

[danowat]

Went and checked his record, yeah he is a bit of a cunt:

He seems like a charming fellow!

 

[Brat-Sampson]

Bold is mine.

To commit to trident but never use it? A collosal waste of money?

Isn't this literally what we've been doing? For the record, if we ever do use Trident there's a very high chance you'll be too dead to celebrate it. If you aren't then god help you.

His funding of the police forces and NHS, is it legitimately viable?

This is all costed and detailed in the manifesto.

The welfare budget, I work my arse off 5 days a week but I believe benefits for those that are struggling are the best this country has ever had to offer, have labour commented on how they will fund it without cuts, cuts, cuts and keep those who need it from becoming poorer?

Manifesto again, but yes, the whole driving goal of this campaign has been that they will provide better support for those in need, that the current situation is despicable and that we should be ashamed of our poverty figures.

Those are the three defining questions in regards to my voting.

Hope you can help. Thanks.

 

[Spuck-uk]

Well as far as i understand this election is basically labour- libdem-SNP vs. Tories and if you look at it that way the election could be close if the voters vote strategically

Not really, as the disintegration of UKIP has meant a tonne of votes flooded to the tories

 

[HazySaiyan]

He seems like a charming fellow!

Oh he is!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-england-32594822

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-16849540

Kinda wish I lived in Calder Valley just so I had the satisfaction of voting against the cunt.

 

[Spuck-uk]

The welfare budget, I work my arse off 5 days a week but I believe benefits for those that are struggling are the best this country has ever had to offer.

Other people have commentated on the rest, but this part is wildly untrue. There are ~3 million people using food banks.

Benefits for the disabled have been brutally cut. Suicide rates have hugely increased as a result. My missus works with people with physical and learning disabilities and what those people have gone through under a Tory government has been fucking disgusting, and will only get worse.

 

[Goodlife]

Bold is mine.

The trident thing is a good point.

The only time we use trident and still live is if we attack a non nuclear nation, and fuck knows what would happen then? We'd, at the very best case, be international rejects then.

If we used it as first strike against a nuclear power, we'd be dead.

If we used it as retaliatory strike against a nuclear power, we'd be dead.

 

[StayDead]

Other people have commentated on the rest, but this part is wildly untrue. There are ~3 million people using food banks.

Benefits for the disabled have been brutally cut. Suicide rates have hugely increased as a result. My missus works with people with physical and learning disabilities and what those people have gone through under a Tory government has been fucking disgusting, and will only get worse.

Can confirm about the disability cuts. My Mum is disabled and has been for 27 years. It leaves her physically unable to work. The only way she can survive is on the meager amount of money she gets from the government which has actually gone down within the past few years. If it wasn't for the fact she lived in a care home then she'd find it very hard to even have enough money for food.

It's disgusting

 

[Lucius86]

The trident thing is a good point.

The only time we use trident and still live is if we attack a non nuclear nation, and fuck knows what would happen then? We'd, at the very best case, be international rejects then.

If we used it as first strike against a nuclear power, we'd be dead.

If we used it as retaliatory strike against a nuclear power, we'd be dead.

You are forgetting the deterrent it brings. It will make other nations think twice against using nuclear weapons against us.

 

[Zakalwe]

To commit to trident but never use it? A collosal waste of money?

You can't use it without killing everyone. He's never said he won't press the button, he's said he's committed to trying to find solutions so he doesn't have to kill us all.

It's no more complicated than that.

His funding of the police forces and NHS, is it legitimately viable?

The manifesto is fully costed and backed by a large number of leading economists. 129 to be exact.

Yes, he has a very real shot at delivering on his promises. Will he get it all done? Maybe not, but he's at least going to try to do the right thing and he has a viable plan.

One that involves raising taxes for the rich, which is why his manifesto is getting attacked by the media owned by the rich.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs
The welfare budget, I work my arse off 5 days a week but I believe benefits for those that are struggling are the best this country has ever had to offer, have labour commented on how they will fund it without cuts, cuts, cuts and keep those who need it from becoming poorer?

Tories will give tax breaks to the rich and increase NI contributions. This = the poor pay more.

Read the Labour manifesto, they have plans to ensure those vulnerable will be better off and they're are viable plans.

I live with a chornic health condition that isn't supported at all by the current welfare system because the nature of it is misunderstood and the symptoms sporadic. I've just had an appeal for a sanction overturn denied and then further rejected by the courts because they misunderstand the nature of my illlness and can't fathom how I could be fine one day and ill the next when a quick google would show them why that's true.

There needs to be radical reform in the processes or people like me will continuously be left with nothing to live on. I've had to sell my PS4, all my games library, my guitar, some clothes, and some sentimental items to survive over the last 6 months because they've given me £5 to live on am month after sanction losses.

I only just managed to score a hardship loan of £170, but that didn't even cover my bills so I'm back to nothing. I'm probably going to have to sell my Switch when I'm out of Hospital next week and I'm pretty depressed about all of this.

And my story is not rare. Please don't say "I got mine, it's all good".

-

Corbyn has the very real potential to take this country in a direction that we've been calling for for years. The last few decades people have shouted from the rooftops for someone to vote for that stands for he people.

Not only does he stand for us all, even those who decry him, but he has the historical integrity and career and voting history to back him up.

He may not be perfect, but he's our one shot for actual, real, meaningful change. And he's the only leader who actually cares about us.

Please, please at least use your vote to help prevent the Tory majority so Labour have a chance to do some good somehow.

 

[Goodlife]

You are forgetting the deterrent it brings. It will make other nations think twice against using nuclear weapons against us.

If anyone used nukes against us, they'd be wiped out in an instance, with or without trident

 

[Audioboxer]

You are forgetting the deterrent it brings. It will make other nations think twice against using nuclear weapons against us.

Because there is a massive list of countries just chomping at the bit to nuke the UK?

Something like 9 countries has nuclear weapons. Please tell me how the rest of Europe survives without them?

 

[nOoblet16]

To commit to trident but never use it? A collosal waste of money?

His funding of the police forces and NHS, is it legitimately viable?

The welfare budget, I work my arse off 5 days a week but I believe benefits for those that are struggling are the best this country has ever had to offer, have labour commented on how they will fund it without cuts, cuts, cuts and keep those who need it from becoming poorer?

Those are the three defining questions in regards to my voting.

Hope you can help. Thanks.

Man I don't mean to come across as rude but there are two things you need to know. The first is regarding thr funding. Did you know that Labour's manifesto is fully costed? The Tories have made it seem like Labour has no idea where they'll find the money with their "magic money tree" rhetoric which the media is selling hard when infact it is fully costed...which is more than what you can say about other parties.



Secondly, regarding nuclear weapons, by focusing on nuclear weapons like that you are looking past so many good things because of a what if scenario where you want him to be vindictive. Think about this for a moment, if a situation ever arises where things go so bad that Britain has to fire a nuclear weapon first then what do you think follows after that? And if Britain isn't the one to fire first then considering the size of the country there wouldn't be much of Britain left to retaliate from and even if we do retaliate then why would we use Nuclear weapons instead of everything else? That'd be a purely vindictive act and you'd want to go down while saying "you killed millions of mine, so I'll kill millions of yours".

Nuclear weapons are a relic of an era long gone. The precision strike capabilities that we have today are far more effective in taking down a centralised target than a nuclear weapon. But in an era with decentralised targets and proxy wars what would a WMD achieve? And should a situation ever arises where things are so bad that the button needs to be pushed then that means diplomacy has failed already. No one is firing a nuclear weapon ever against someone on this planet ever, it didn't happen during the cold war days when international diplomacy and globalisation were in its infancy and tensions between countries were high...it is definitely not going to happen now when countries rely so much more on each other and diplomacy is far better than what it used to be like. This is all common sense.

Don't decide your vote based on a what if scenario that you know will never happen, when there are far more real scenarios that are actually happening and will happen.

 

[Lucius86]

If anyone used nukes against us, they'd be wiped out in an instance, with or without trident

I wouldn't be so quick to assume people would rush to our aid in such a deadly scenario.

 

[D4Danger]

At least in the next election we won't have to talk about any of this

 

[itsbenoclock]

To commit to trident but never use it? A collosal waste of money

It's a colossal waste of money, but it sure gets votes. Nuclear arms are inherently pointless, but that's why it's called MAD

 

[nOoblet16]

You are forgetting the deterrent it brings. It will make other nations think twice against using nuclear weapons against us.

Globalisation and reliance on other countries is a far bigger and more real deterrent than some WMD that only 9 countries have...most of whom are allies anyways.

 

[Ashes]

I just read up on the UK election rules. It appears that May only need around 16-20 votes for majority? Uh, that's so close for comfort. Would Labour and Con work together? Or SNP and Labour? I don't think SNP would form a government with May, right?

Labour would not work with Conservatives.

Labour policies now have a lot of crossover with SNP pledges.

 

[faridmon]

Whoever wins we lose.

Not sure I'm even going to vote tomorrow.

I will never in my lifetime vote Tory and corbyn is a fucking jobsworth

Please vote, its mentality like this why we get governments who does not have the best interest in people since the old people who don't give a fuck about the future of the country will vote and they are gonna fuck you over

 

[NekoFever]

You are forgetting the deterrent it brings. It will make other nations think twice against using nuclear weapons against us.

Which ones aren't going to think twice about nuking anyone?

 

[Khoryos]

I wouldn't be so quick to assume people would rush to our aid in such a deadly scenario.

If anyone nuked anyone, full stop, the rest of the world would kick the shit out of them.

 

[jimbobsmells]

EDIT: Also, random question, when did the BBC News' comment section get over-run by right wing fucktards?

After the Tories started taking about scrapping the licence fee.

 

[TimmmV]

I wouldn't be so quick to assume people would rush to our aid in such a deadly scenario.

I would look at it differently - what realistic situations are there where a nation who possesses nuclear weapons feels the need to use a first strike one against the UK?

 

[Audioboxer]

I would look at it differently - what realistic situations are there where a nation who possesses nuclear weapons feels the need to use a first strike one against the UK?

When Rockstar announce GTA6 will be a F2P MP game with loot boxes.

 

[Protome]

If anyone used nukes against us, they'd be wiped out in an instance, with or without trident

This is true. The only thing Trident is realistically capable of hitting is the smoking crater left by whoever shot first being wiped out by the rest of the world.

When Rockstar announce GTA6 will be a F2P MP game with loot boxes.

So we should keep Trident post independence?

 

[Audioboxer]

This is true. The only thing Trident is realistically capable of hitting is the smoking crater left by whoever shot first being wiped out by the rest of the world.


So we should keep Trident post independence?

Possibly. Rockstar will probably make 2x the cost of Trident in a year with loot boxes.

Russia is probably going to threaten to nuke Rockstar North if they do not release Agent soon as well.

 

[Maledict]

Blair got a landslide and the papers on side but I don't remember such huge political crowds all so suddenly.

Are you kidding? Were you voting in 97? ;-) Go watch the news reports of the massive spontaneous crowds that formed to welcome him to Downing Street.

The amount of hope and change that Blair carried with him, and the support, was astonishing. There was vast amount of tactical voting to push the conservatives out, from a huge groundswell of support for change.

 

[Lucius86]

Because there is a massive list of countries just chomping at the bit to nuke the UK?

Something like 9 countries has nuclear weapons. Please tell me how the rest of Europe survives without them?

Those countries are just fine without nukes. Lay off the sarcasm; I was just raising a point not mentioned and this thread can easily be an echo chamber of thoughts. 9 countries are listed, doesn't mean others aren't developing/have them we are unaware of. It's also selfish to think we would only ever use Trident for UK's interests - what about protecting other EU nations who don't have nuclear weapon capabilities?

I personally am not sure on Trident - it's a heck of a lot of money and ideally they should go in a more stable world. But unlike some, I like to at least listen and argue all points before making a decision, even if I don't necessarily agree with them. Truthfully I'm torn on the topic.

Much like who I'm voting for. Still undecided.

 

[TimmmV]

When Rockstar announce GTA6 will be a F2P MP game with loot boxes.

I think even Corbyn would concede that would be totally deserved

Wouldn't be too good for Scotland though

 

[Goodlife]

what about protecting other EU nations who don't have nuclear weapon capabilities?

Against who?

 

[TimmmV]

Those countries are just fine without nukes. Lay off the sarcasm; I was just raising a point not mentioned and this thread can easily be an echo chamber of thoughts. 9 countries are listed, doesn't mean others aren't developing/have them we are unaware of. It's also selfish to think we would only ever use Trident for UK's interests - what about protecting other EU nations who don't have nuclear weapon capabilities?

I personally am not sure on Trident - it's a heck of a lot of money and ideally they should go in a more stable world. But unlike some, I like to at least listen and argue all points before making a decision, even if I don't necessarily agree with them. Truthfully I'm torn on the topic.

Much like who I'm voting for. Still undecided.

There is a reason these countries don't have nukes though - they see what a huge waste of money it is to spend on a weapon that will never actually be used.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

After the Tories started taking about scrapping the licence fee.

I really like all the BBC services but they probably should scrap the licence fee. Or at least, not collect it in the same way. Just take it out of general taxation.

 

[Auctopus]

You are forgetting the deterrent it brings. It will make other nations think twice against using nuclear weapons against us.

If you are hit by a nuclear weapon...

1) The deterrent didn't work.
2) Negotions have already failed.
3) Even if you had Nukes, the country is probably in no state to launch them and millions of lives have been lost.

In the scenario of already being hit by a nuclear weapon, I don't see a real advantage to owning a stockpile of your own nuclear weapons. Unless you're trying to decide who will rule the Nuclear Winter Wasteland.

 

[Audioboxer]

Those countries are just fine without nukes. Lay off the sarcasm; I was just raising a point not mentioned and this thread can easily be an echo chamber of thoughts. 9 countries are listed, doesn't mean others aren't developing/have them we are unaware of. It's also selfish to think we would only ever use Trident for UK's interests - what about protecting other EU nations who don't have nuclear weapon capabilities?

I personally am not sure on Trident - it's a heck of a lot of money and ideally they should go in a more stable world. But unlike some, I like to at least listen and argue all points before making a decision, even if I don't necessarily agree with them. Truthfully I'm torn on the topic.

Much like who I'm voting for. Still undecided.

If that's the way of thinking anyone wants to subscribe to you might as well just pass that off to America will scorch planet earth if it comes to it. Trying to put the UK forward as some "Knight to protect the EU" is precisely how we get The Nuclear Nine on national TV with bloodlust in their eyes that the UK is a force to be reckoned with.

As for most of us listening, the evidence is quite clear the terrorism prospects we face these days require on the ground troops (as in police forces too, not just Army), both in our country (and occasionally abroad) alongside traditional defences and intelligence agencies. Nuclear weapons haven't done anything to protect us from the bloodshed we do see on our own soil. Arguably abroad we've already made enough ridiculous mistakes as it is, without even for one second considering nuclear 1st strikes on any of the countries we've invaded.

I think even Corbyn would concede that would be totally deserved

Wouldn't be too good for Scotland though

Whisky and GTA loot boxes, powering Scotland's economy.

 

[Beefy]

So who is taking Abbott's place?

 

[Lucius86]

Against who?

We don't know who it could be against - other countries under the radar, aliens, NeoGAF - I said that in my post. Hence why it can be seen a deterrent. Not as much as globalisation and other nuclear capable nations chiming in to protect allies as already mentioned. But leaving the dirty work to someone else leaves me feeling somewhat uneasy.

 

[Ashes]

Are you kidding? Were you voting in 97? ;-) Go watch the news reports of the massive spontaneous crowds that formed to welcome him to Downing Street.

The amount of hope and change that Blair carried with him, and the support, was astonishing. There was vast amount of tactical voting to push the conservatives out, from a huge groundswell of support for change.

I've been looking at reports. And Corbyn is pulling in crowds at Reading etc..

Hmm. Will be interesting.

 

[Lucius86]

If that's the way of thinking anyone wants to subscribe to you might as well just pass that off to America will scorch planet earth if it comes to it. Trying to put the UK forward as some "Knight to protect the EU" is precisely how we get The Nuclear Nine on national TV with bloodlust in their eyes that the UK is a force to be reckoned with.

That's a very valid point.

 

[WhateverItTakes]

More of YouGov, showing the gap tightening very slightly. No idea how things are gonna fall by the end.

 

[SlipperyFishes]

For all the people commenting on Diane Abbott - read this chain.

https://twitter.com/MxJackMonroe/status/872419798017245184

That is one hell of a fucking CV she has and the racist drivel on Twitter is just abysmal. Fuck the Tories and their core.

 

[DJKhaled]

Whoever wins we lose.

Not sure I'm even going to vote tomorrow.

I will never in my lifetime vote Tory and corbyn is a fucking jobsworth

Jesus christ. How do people still think like this? After trump, brexit and all the other shit how the fuck can any sane person think this shit?

 

[Zakalwe]

For all the people commenting on Diane Abbott - read this chain.

https://twitter.com/MxJackMonroe/status/872419798017245184

That is one hell of a fucking CV she has and the racist drivel on Twitter is just abysmal. Fuck the Tories and their core.

Abbot as a politician was fine, even good.

Abbot in front of the camera was a disaster. Not entirely her own fault, but she just wasn't good at bringing her points across in a way that could penetrate and she was weaponized by the opposition. The latter part was entirely unfair. I've proud of Corbyn for standing by her, he did the right thing in terms of integrity.

Nothing she's done however justifies the clearly racist/sexist fuelled vitriol. It's disgusting, just as much of the Tory campaign and their social media representation has been.

 

[Theonik]

I'm really getting exhausted by those endless arguments at this point and some posts here and in other threads are legitimately depressing.

We don't know who it could be against - other countries under the radar, aliens, NeoGAF - I said that in my post. Hence why it can be seen a deterrent. Not as much as globalisation and other nuclear capable nations chiming in to protect allies as already mentioned. But leaving the dirty work to someone else leaves me feeling somewhat uneasy.

FYI, having nukes and not advertising them is pretty much the worst nuclear policy you can have. You get no deterrent as people aren't expecting you to strike back, and second strike is pointless, it is only useful as a threat in the interests of deterrence.