The Starmer Labour government
- This topic has 104 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 18 hours, 10 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The Anti-Labour government´s forthcoming measures to hit the working class even harder
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/cost-of-living/five-dwp-benefits-payments-most-31207823
Also, more spending on military offense at the expense of foreign aid
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/extra-uk-defense-spending-help-050000860.html
Front page headline in yesterday’s Times
UK SENDS MESSAGE TO PUTIN ABOUT DETERRENT
Subheading:
“We have the nuclear weapons to cause ‘untold damage’ if attacked, warns defence secretary”.
If that’s not war-mongering, what is? Of course it’s only posturing as, unlike France, Britain doesn’t have an independent nuclear deterrent. The British nuclear missiles can’t be fired without US participation and so permission. In any event, Russia is unlikely to attack Britain in the first place.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2028958/UK-nuclear-weapons-US-Russia
Not according to this.
When Starmer’s intended war venture comes to nothing, and with a part of the Labour Party itself murmuring, and he is disgraced, will his welfare cuts also be repealed?
This is how CND explains the position with regard to UK dependence on the US for its nuclear weapons:
Thanks.
Maybe they could sell Starmer glove puppets, holding a missile instead of a stick, but in every other way bearing an uncanny resemblance to Mr. Punch.
Without comment:
“Carlson then asks “what the hell is going with Keir Starmer saying he is going to send British troops – their entire military is smaller than the US marine corps. The country is dying economically all of those countries are dying economically.
What are they thinking ? Is it a posture and a pose ?”
Witkoff replies “I think it’s a combination of a posture and a pose and a combination of also being simplistic. There is this sort of notion that we have all got to be like Winston Churchill. Russia is going to march across Europe.
That is preposterous by the way.”“Now, however, Reeves’s advisers openly admit that the high growth implied by Labour’s manifesto is a pipe dream.”
So reports Times columnist Patrick Maguire (21 March).
Implied by? No, it was promised by and proclaimed from the rooftops. If Labour was elected it was going to “grow” the economy. They thought they could control capitalism and could simply will growth.
Their excuse for failing (after less than a year)?
“‘The world is changing,’ one says. ‘Global uncertainty means growth across the world – in the eurozone, the US and the UK. — has been hit’.”
We don’t recall any proviso in their election promise that they might be blown off course.
We said they would fail (unless they were lucky and be in office when capitalism entered a boom phase of its uncontrollable economic cycle) but have to admit to being surprised at being proved right so quickly.
For the record and without comment:
“Millions of poorer families and disabled people will lose thousands of pounds a year after chancellor Rachel Reeves slashed benefits to fill a new £14 billion black hole in Britain’s finances — but boosted military spending.
Her cuts mean 250,000 more people will be pushed into poverty in five years, the government’s own figures show. Some 3.2million families on Universal Credit will lose £1,720 a year, and 800,000 fewer people with physical and mental health issues will get Personal Independence Payments, losing an average of £4,500 a year.
But Ms Reeves also revealed an extra £2.2million for defence in her Spring Statement, and £400 million to help UK arms manufacturers build hi-tech drones and AI-weapons to ‘make the UK a defence industry superpower’.”
(Metro, 27 March)Attack on a Quaker meeting house.
Reformmuck tries to overtake Labour on the left:
https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/reform-uks-leader-nigel-farage-10091214.amp
This strategy might work to steal Labour votes.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.