The Unofficial and Independent Leyton Orient Message Board
https://lofcforum.com/forum1/phpBB3/
Any more info?
Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Nov 08, 2023 7:20 pm Out of the following two options, which one is most likely and realistic to achieve a ceasefire:
1. Demanding a ceasefire immediately from the current state of war.
Or
2. Negotiating a "pause" in hostilities to allow humanitarian aid. With these becoming more frequent and prolonged and normalised.
Anyone who genuinely believes in the first option... Well, enjoy your day out on Saturday.
Anyone who believes it is the second option, no matter how much they may wish it was the first... Well, that's pretty much the plan. And is what US Sec. Blinken is hinting at and is supported by most governments (and Labour).
Anyone seriously agitating for a Labour MP to publicly declare for the first option is either deluded or disingenuous in their true intentions and motivations.
Exactly, having a vote on something you have no control over is totally pointless.Secondly, an opposition party voting on whether to call for a ceasefire is just pointless gesturing and cynical constituency politics. It has absolutely nothing to do with morals.
I find it weird you take this view with effective every show of support like votes or protests. Effectively, a proven way of getting voices heard that has time and again created change.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 7:54 amExactly, having a vote on something you have no control over is totally pointless.Secondly, an opposition party voting on whether to call for a ceasefire is just pointless gesturing and cynical constituency politics. It has absolutely nothing to do with morals.
Agree on the cynical constituency politics being the driving factor behind these resignations.Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 6:34 am This is ridiculous.
Firstly, all the shadow front bench MPs resigning are just doing so to prevent Starmer having to sack them. Once some time has passed they can then be appointed again.
Secondly, an opposition party voting on whether to call for a ceasefire is just pointless gesturing and cynical constituency politics. It has absolutely nothing to do with morals.
As I said on the Israel thread:
Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Nov 08, 2023 7:20 pm Out of the following two options, which one is most likely and realistic to achieve a ceasefire:
1. Demanding a ceasefire immediately from the current state of war.
Or
2. Negotiating a "pause" in hostilities to allow humanitarian aid. With these becoming more frequent and prolonged and normalised.
Anyone who genuinely believes in the first option... Well, enjoy your day out on Saturday.
Anyone who believes it is the second option, no matter how much they may wish it was the first... Well, that's pretty much the plan. And is what US Sec. Blinken is hinting at and is supported by most governments (and Labour).
Anyone seriously agitating for a Labour MP to publicly declare for the first option is either deluded or disingenuous in their true intentions and motivations.
She'll go far.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:11 am I liked Helen Hayes' statement where she said she'd continue to represent her constituents' wishes by calling a ceasefire but then confirmed she'd abstained.
I respect protests with realistic aims. 'Just stop oil' or 'ceasefire now' obviously havent been. To me they seem dumb, naive and petulant with little thought as to the consequences of what would happen if their demands were actually met or if they're even achiveable.Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:23 amI find it weird you take this view with effective every show of support like votes or protests. Effectively, a proven way of getting voices heard that has time and again created change.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 7:54 amExactly, having a vote on something you have no control over is totally pointless.Secondly, an opposition party voting on whether to call for a ceasefire is just pointless gesturing and cynical constituency politics. It has absolutely nothing to do with morals.
Are you forgetting that Corbyn was loto at a time where Tory divisions meant we had effectively a hung parliament? He actually did stop May's Brexit 3 times.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:23 am Odd how a significant % of people saying Starmer supporting a ceasefire motion would have been pointless because LOTO doesn't have any power over it were also slating Corbyn for not stopping Brexit, which as LOTO he didn't have any power over. One could almost say there was a lack of consistency in people's assessment of the reach and remit of the role.
Hang on, Brexit didn't happen?Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:43 amAre you forgetting that Corbyn was loto at a time where Tory divisions meant we had effectively a hung parliament? He actually did stop May's Brexit 3 times.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:23 am Odd how a significant % of people saying Starmer supporting a ceasefire motion would have been pointless because LOTO doesn't have any power over it were also slating Corbyn for not stopping Brexit, which as LOTO he didn't have any power over. One could almost say there was a lack of consistency in people's assessment of the reach and remit of the role.
I'm not sure there's a real equivalence here.
May’s Brexit proposals were more or less what Labour are asking for now and could have voted for a better deal. She was bending over backwards to get a deal but same old Labour rather played politics than think what was best for the country then got us where we are now as the result of 2019. Labour now saying want to renegotiate the deal when could have had it ages ago. May was a Remainer , she was clever ceding ground but Labour were too obstinate to smell the coffee.Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:43 amAre you forgetting that Corbyn was loto at a time where Tory divisions meant we had effectively a hung parliament? He actually did stop May's Brexit 3 times.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:23 am Odd how a significant % of people saying Starmer supporting a ceasefire motion would have been pointless because LOTO doesn't have any power over it were also slating Corbyn for not stopping Brexit, which as LOTO he didn't have any power over. One could almost say there was a lack of consistency in people's assessment of the reach and remit of the role.
I'm not sure there's a real equivalence here.
Didn't Starmer and all the other #FBPE / 2nd Referendum lot have a big part in that as well? I thought Corbyn was a mere passenger when it came to Labour's position on Brexit. They're eventual policy going into the 19 election was from memory pushed hard by the likes of Starmer et al.Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:43 amAre you forgetting that Corbyn was loto at a time where Tory divisions meant we had effectively a hung parliament? He actually did stop May's Brexit 3 times.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:23 am Odd how a significant % of people saying Starmer supporting a ceasefire motion would have been pointless because LOTO doesn't have any power over it were also slating Corbyn for not stopping Brexit, which as LOTO he didn't have any power over. One could almost say there was a lack of consistency in people's assessment of the reach and remit of the role.
I'm not sure there's a real equivalence here.
What utter nonsense. Mays Brexit deal failed because of the rabid right wing of the Tory party. Rees-Mogg and his gang in the so called ERGLoin Cloth Lenny wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 12:01 pmMay’s Brexit proposals were more or less what Labour are asking for now and could have voted for a better deal. She was bending over backwards to get a deal but same old Labour rather played politics than think what was best for the country then got us where we are now as the result of 2019. Labour now saying want to renegotiate the deal when could have had it ages ago. May was a Remainer , she was clever ceding ground but Labour were too obstinate to smell the coffee.Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:43 amAre you forgetting that Corbyn was loto at a time where Tory divisions meant we had effectively a hung parliament? He actually did stop May's Brexit 3 times.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:23 am Odd how a significant % of people saying Starmer supporting a ceasefire motion would have been pointless because LOTO doesn't have any power over it were also slating Corbyn for not stopping Brexit, which as LOTO he didn't have any power over. One could almost say there was a lack of consistency in people's assessment of the reach and remit of the role.
I'm not sure there's a real equivalence here.
Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:54 amHang on, Brexit didn't happen?Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:43 amAre you forgetting that Corbyn was loto at a time where Tory divisions meant we had effectively a hung parliament? He actually did stop May's Brexit 3 times.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:23 am Odd how a significant % of people saying Starmer supporting a ceasefire motion would have been pointless because LOTO doesn't have any power over it were also slating Corbyn for not stopping Brexit, which as LOTO he didn't have any power over. One could almost say there was a lack of consistency in people's assessment of the reach and remit of the role.
I'm not sure there's a real equivalence here.