General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time

[MikeUpNorth]

So...it escalates from there and then what happens? We launch a first strike on Russia, a nuclear superpower? And they what? Reduce the whole of the UK to rubble?
So there we're basically talking about Pakistan I'm guessing? So again, what? We're launching a first nuclear strike.
Why would we get involved in a conflict with Israel?
The last one is a possibility I guess. In that case, what's the purpose of one of those countries nuking the UK?

What I'm trying to convey is the possibility of a nuclear weapon being used is real. I am of the belief that if anyone fires a nuke, there's a high probability that the whole world goes up in flames in the chain reaction. But wait, I hear you ask, doesn't that just reinforce the point that we should swear to never fire a nuke? I would say no, the sensible tactic is to keep up the pretence that any nuclear attack will be met with an overwhelming response. For the MAD doctrine to work, you have to at least say you'd nuke them back.

With Trump wavering on the whole principle of collective defence (clause 5) within Nato, it's now more important than ever that the UK is clear that it is willing to provide our side of the nuclear equation to keep the MAD balance in tact.

By saying we would potentially nuke people, we actually lower the possibility of nukes being used. Counterintuitive, but I genuinely think that's the case.

Do you think any of these scenarios are even mildly realistic?

I'd say the terrorist attack on US or Korean implosion are the most likely to happen in the next five years. Not massively likely, but at least 5% chance if I had to put a number on it.

And, its a wonder that countries like Japan, Germany, Canada, Australia, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Austria or the other 171 countries manage to get by without these dilemmas about which country they may have to nuke in the next 5 years.

They rely on Nato membership and the principle of collective defence. Our nukes are their nukes effectively.

 

[SteveJ]

'Never mind the foodbanks - here's the distractionary bollocks'.

 

[Damien]

The Daily Mail and Daily Express appear to have swapped headlines

 

[africanspur]

I'll refer anyone chatting here about launching a first strike/retaliation to the movie Threads for how utterly, utterly pointless this discussion is.

If it gets to that point, we've already lost, all of us.

I've not seen that film but one of my favourite films is War Games (I know strange choice). One of those classic futility of nuclear war films from the 80s.

 

[africanspur]

'Never mind the foodbanks - here's the distractionary bollocks'.

Indeed. Never mind the inequality, poverty, homelessness and Brexit and other such minor points. Are you willing to kill millions of Koreans or Iranians? That is the important question here.

 

[DenisIrwin]

I've not seen that film but one of my favourite films is War Games (I know strange choice). One of those classic futility of nuclear war films from the 80s.

Gotta mention Dr Strangelove, surely.

 

[montpelier]

He's right in the sense that the point of a nuclear deterrent is to deter a scenario that'd give rise to their use. But that kind of falls down when you admit you won't use them. They then stop becoming a deterrent because on what basis would they deter anyone?

Because you have them & they can be launched.

Enough to keep me slightly concerned, anyway.

 

[Dobba]

Gotta mention Dr Strangelove, surely.

They'd be too busy getting angry at the benefit scrounger standing up out of his wheelchair at the end to remember the message of the film.

 

[DenisIrwin]

 

[Sweet Square]

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Indeed. Never mind the inequality, poverty, homelessness and Brexit and other such minor points. Are you willing to kill millions of Koreans or Iranians? That is the important question here.

Call me crazy, but I like to see at least some discussion of the very real existential threats to humanity alongside all the other issues. Especially as we're considering giving this man the power to end the world.

 

[Silva]

Call me crazy, but I like to see at least some discussion of the very real existential threats to humanity alongside all the other issues. Especially as we're considering giving this man the power to end the world.

Surely the one person you want to have that power is the person who won't actually use it.

 

[Untied]

Well let's be honest, "no deal" is not acceptable for us or the EU. No EU bureaucrat has stated that "no deal" is a possibility. It would be catastrophic for us and the EU, hence the reason why it won't happen. But if we aren't willing to walk away, it means we have a price where we will fold.

I'm confused. Is 'no deal' acceptable for us or not?

 

[Oscie]

Call me crazy, but I like to see at least some discussion of the very real existential threats to humanity alongside all the other issues. Especially as we're considering giving this man the power to end the world.

I think these are the sorts of questions the 'always vote' brigade who might describe themselves as conservative (note the small 'c') will be asking themselves. It's fine where we have an echo chamber of a thread where largely people cite pro-Corbyn views or seek out pro-Corbyn tweets but I don't think the section about national security would go down well with the audience tonight.

 

[Untied]

Call me crazy, but I like to see at least some discussion of the very real existential threats to humanity alongside all the other issues. Especially as we're considering giving this man the power to end the world.

I must have missed you clamouring for a question about climate change.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Surely the one person you want to have that power is the person who won't actually use it.

As I said above, the ideal person from my point of view is someone who is very clear they'll use it in defence/retaliation, but never launch a first strike. Whether they would ACTUALLY launch a retaliatory strike is pretty irrelevant to me - the world would be ending either way most likely.

 

[lem8sh]

Gotta nuke something

 

[rcoobc]

One thing that annoys me is football managers who have no top level playing experience

The crossover in skillset between frontline health professional and secretary of state for health is essentially zero.

And yet, often footballers do actually make quite good football managers.

Spoiler

More than that though, sometimes people who work with the reserves or youth team of a great club, make great managers. Zidane. Pep. Tito. They know the club, understand it, know what needs to be changed. Both Pep and Zidane were great players and understand how to be a great player. Both Pep and Zidane worked with the youth team, getting to know the role. Sir Alex played as both a player and as a manager, first in the lower leagues of Scotland finally working his way up to Man Utd

Oh, and that person you are claiming had no top level experience?

Spoiler

He had a tonne of relevant top level experience, experience where he'd learnt from the very best. First at Sporting, with Sir Bobby Robson, then at Porto, with Sir Bobby Robson and finally at Barcelona, with Sir Bobby Robson.

No top level experience indeed.

I think what you've said about the "skillset between frontline health professional and secretary of state for health" being completely different is entirely correct. They are hugely different skills, which is why Parliament isn't filled with Doctors and Surgeons. But I think you are entirely incorrect in saying that there would be no benefit whatsoever. Even your average doctor and nurse would have a much clearer understanding of what problems are facing the NHS than Jeremy Hunt.

But being Health Secretary is very different from being Chancellor. This idea of shuffling MPs around the cabinet is nonsensical. It's like asking an Accountant to also be a Doctor

 

[Ubik]

Would any of you change your vote if Corbyn said he'd be prepared to use Trident?

 

[MikeUpNorth]

I must have missed you clamouring for a question about climate change.

...

I'm a Labour member and wet liberal lefty, but this dismissal of the nuclear question is crazy to me. It's one of the biggest issues facing humanity, along with climate change, it could literally be the end of the world. It should be one of the first discussions in any election.

 

[Dobba]

Would any of you change your vote if Corbyn said he'd be prepared to use Trident?

If he promised he'd aim it in our direction, so that a good old British nuke did the killing and skin peeling before Johnny Foreigner's got here, he'd probably clean up the UKIP vote.

 

[Damien]

https://twitter.com/i/moments/870763371771121664

Tomorrow's front pages:
The National (Scotland): Never mind the coalition of chaos, it's... the social justice league
The Sun: Tory-BBC war on leftie mob (yeah, apparently they were treated unfairly tonight too)
The Guardian: Labour accuses Tories of using fake news ads to attack Corbyn
The Daily Telegraph: Tory tax pledge to high earners
i: Tory shock at criminal charges
Daily Mirror: Tory MP charged over election expenses
Daily Express: Sturgeon: I'll help Corbyn
FT: May reaches out to business as Brexit tensions escalate

Pretty boring. Guess they'll save the juicy stuff for Sunday.

 

[Ubik]

https://twitter.com/i/moments/870763371771121664

Tomorrow's front pages:
The National (Scotland): Never mind the coalition of chaos, it's... the social justice league
The Sun: Tory-BBC war on leftie mob (yeah, apparently they were treated unfairly tonight too)
The Guardian: Labour accuses Tories of using fake news ads to attack Corbyn
The Daily Telegraph: Tory tax pledge to high earners
i: Tory shock at criminal charges
Daily Mirror: Tory MP charged over election expenses
Daily Express: Sturgeon: I'll help Corbyn
FT: May reaches out to business as Brexit tensions escalate

Pretty boring. Guess they'll save the juicy stuff for Sunday.

Interesting to see if there are any second editions later.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Not from an eastern european perspective, with people entering simply because they can, are concerned.


Well let's be honest, "no deal" is not acceptable for us or the EU. No EU bureaucrat has stated that "no deal" is a possibility. It would be catastrophic for us and the EU, hence the reason why it won't happen. But if we aren't willing to walk away, it means we have a price where we will fold.

If the EU is aware of massive opposition in parliament, they can use it to their advantage, and of course we know they would.

But the eastern Europeans are part of the EU, there were still 170000 immigrants from outside the EU, additionally the emigration of Brits will reduce if the freedom of movement is lost so even if EU immigration stopped altogether, which it won't, the Uk was still well outside the "below 100000 " which has been promised for 7 years already.

No deal is not good for either, no, but the only way a deal will be agreed is if she accepts the terms, which will not be a no contribution access to the free market or stoppage of the 4 freedoms.

But it's not the electorate who is deciding what deal will be accepted, May doesn't want anyone to know what's being discussed, including the British people.
However, it will be known from the EU side.

 

[nimic]

...

Liberal lefty? That's Yankee talk.

 

[WackyWengerWorld]

I'm guessing the cut off part was her saying that in the interest of electoral fairness, that was said to him before he went on.

Kind of rubbish though - his song is anti-tory, if you're worried about being seen as biased then don't have him on or also have a person who wrote a pro-Tory song that's been downloaded by thousands of people on as well. Oh right, there isn't one

Or the BBC has been bullyboyed by the goverment and it's power over it's funding.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

Would any of you change your vote if Corbyn said he'd be prepared to use Trident?

obviously, but only if it was used during fox hunting......

 

[Berbasbullet]

https://uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz
https://voteforpolicies.org.uk/survey/1/select-issues

These might help. If you've been reading manifestos then you're better informed than most.

Thanks man, I am completely ignorant and only hear drips and drops, which I worry are mainly useless platitudes that aren't accurate.

 

[SteveJ]

Apparently, complaining that your wages haven't risen in eight years equals this: "there isn't a magic money tree that we can shake that suddenly provides for everything that people want." A real insight into May's thinking there: patronising, exasperated, and dismissive of healthcare professionals; to her, they're spoilt children, obviously.

 

[Cheesy]

Apparently Alistair Campbell's endorsed Corbyn.

 

[Silva]

Would any of you change your vote if Corbyn said he'd be prepared to use Trident?

I don't think anyone would believe him.

 

[Cheesy]

Apparently, complaining that your wages haven't risen in eight years equals this: "there isn't a magic money tree that we can shake that suddenly provides for everything that people want." A real insight into May's thinking there: patronising, exasperated, and dismissive of healthcare professionals; to her, they're spoilt children, obviously.

Rudd was using the whole "magic money tree" tactic the other hand and it was especially condescending. Especially from a Tory party who, while in government, have failed to get rid of the deficit despite claiming they would do so, saw the pound fall dramatically after an EU referendum recklessly enacted by Cameron for the good of his party, and who haven't even bothered to cost their own manifesto. For all Corbyn's possible over-ambition, at least he seems to have an economic vision. I'm not sure what the Tory economic philosophy is right now.

 

[Dobba]

Apparently Alistair Campbell's endorsed Corbyn.

As long as McTernan doesn't, he stands a chance.

 

[Sweet Square]

U.K. Foreign Secretary PT 2

 

[Ubik]

I don't think anyone would believe him.

Maybe not, but you'd only spend one minute on the question rather than 15.

 

[Cheesy]

As long as McTernan doesn't, he stands a chance.

In all seriousness though, think this highlights that people always end up responding to power in politics. When he was trailing in the polls and new to the job, most of the party never took him seriously and wanted him gone. Now he's closing in, we're seeing more and more people back him, even in spite of certain differences. Would be a big positive if he can get in and pull different wings of the party together in order to govern effectively.

 

[Dobba]

Maybe not, but you'd only spend one minute on the question rather than 15.

In the same way that him repeatedly condemning bombings has completely made that issue disappear.

 

[Cheesy]

U.K. Foreign Secretary PT 2

Moron.

 

[rcoobc]

Would any of you change your vote if Corbyn said he'd be prepared to use Trident?

The questions about Trident are a joke.

1) We don't have tactical nuke capability. Our subs aren't designed for it. If we needed to, we'd phone the Yanks, and ask them to do it.

2) The biggest threats to our country aren't from countries with Nuclear capability, it is from terrorist states and rogue agencies that can get their hands of WMDs. How do you nuke someone who delivers a weapon into the centre of your city on the back of a truck?

3) We have a Nuclear DETERRENT. It's a second use weapon. Wipe us out, and we will wipe you out. That's what the letters are about.

Bunch of thickos.

 

[Sweet Square]

Tory lying and racism