Labour leadership

[kabbes]

Needs the follow-up:

 

[newbie]

What on earth posessed Corbyn to say that? Does he have some kind of Christian impulse to testify, brother?

What would have been wrong with "As I understand it, the whole point of 'deterrence' is to keep everyone guessing!"?

the problem with a policy of straight talking without soundbites is that it leaves the commentariat to find and pounce upon any bits it pleases. The Blair/Campbell approach ensured that headlines were dominated by the carefully crafted soundbite they'd chosen, to the extent that years later everyone can finish off the phrase "tough on ..."

Whether anyone likes it or not, it's not a particularly realistic media policy.

 

[chandlerp]

Those people going on and on about it being a deterrant really have not got a clue about the current threats in the world.

The only people that would launch a nuclear weapon are those who couldn't give a shit that they would be destroyed in return. Would, in fact, welcome the martyrdom. Mutually assured destruction is not something would bother them a jot.

 

[stethoscope]

the problem with a policy of straight talking without soundbites is that it leaves the commentariat to find and pounce upon any bits it pleases. The Blair/Campbell approach ensured that headlines were dominated by the carefully crafted soundbite they'd chosen, to the extent that years later everyone can finish off the phrase "tough on ..."

Whether anyone likes it or not, it's not a particularly realistic media policy.

That's not really true is it - the commentariat and media have always pounced on whether someone says something straight, or cleverly crafted, or even not at all. God help us that we have more Blairite and Campbell style spin and soundbytes. Sorry, but I'd rather have straight talking but people who actually believe in something, than liberals too scared by what the media might say/interpret it as.

 

[danny la rouge]

Those people going on and on about it being a deterrant really have not got a clue about the current threats in the world.

The only people that would launch a nuclear weapon are those who couldn't give a shit that they would be destroyed in return. Would, in fact, welcome the martyrdom. Mutually assured destruction is not something would bother them a jot.

Never mind who *has* nuclear capability, deterrence means those *without* it are also deterred. Everyone knows the Danish have long coveted our yeast extract manufacturing plants. Without Trident we'd all be putting Marmite on round rusks from packets and eating sandwiches without a top slice of bread.

The people of Burton on Trent have good reason to be grateful for Trident!

 

[newbie]

That's not really true is it - the commentariat and media have always pounced on whether someone says something straight, or cleverly crafted, or even not at all. God help us that we have more Blairite and Campbell style spin and soundbytes. Sorry, but I'd rather have straight talking but people who actually believe in something, than liberals too scared by what the media might say/interpret it as.

aye, but straight talking of the type under discussion presents far too many hostages to fortune and achieves, well what? Those of us opposed to Trident nod sagely, and the ones who believe this country is but seconds from annihilation will have their prejudices about Corbyn confirmed. How does that help anything or anybody? Seems to me to be likely to simply harden the opposition to his policies and approach. He's a politician, and now very prominent and polarising, so needs to choose his battles, positions and words with care. If that involves tactical ambiguity, as Laptop suggested, in order to reframe the debate then that's simply a practical recognition that he can't win every argument now, this week.

 

[discokermit]

a friend phoned me yesterday. she's self employed, the money is fairly good (though not so good when you consider the seventy plus hours a week when in work and weeks or months without work in between), she bought a flat in london with some money from a dead aunt and some from her mom but still had to have a lodger to pay the mortgage. she hardly ever votes but last time voted tory.
anyway, she told me she was moving towards labour, couldn't believe she had voted tory and wanted to know what i thought about corbyn!

 

[Artaxerxes]

Never mind who *has* nuclear capability, deterrence means those *without* it are also deterred. Everyone knows the Danish have long coveted our yeast extract manufacturing plants. Without Trident we'd all be putting Marmite on round rusks from packets and eating sandwiches without a top slice of bread.

The people of Burton on Trent have good reason to be grateful for Trident!

Sealand is just waiting for us to disarm the nukes, when we do... god help us all.

 

[Athos]

The Blair/Campbell approach ensured that headlines were dominated by the carefully crafted soundbite they'd chosen, to the extent that years later everyone can finish off the phrase "tough on ..."

... crime; toff on the corpses of swine.

 

[billy_bob]

That's not really true is it - the commentariat and media have always pounced on whether someone says something straight, or cleverly crafted, or even not at all. God help us that we have more Blairite and Campbell style spin and soundbytes. Sorry, but I'd rather have straight talking but people who actually believe in something, than liberals too scared by what the media might say/interpret it as.

Yes and no. People are considerably less reliant on the mainstream media than they were in Blair and Campbell's heyday, so even when they more or less unite in their selective reporting, other interpretations - and of course the full uninterpreted text of the actual speech - are readily available too.

I'm not suggesting that that mainstream monopoly has no power or that it can safely be completely ignored, but I think its worth considering, as Corbyn's camp seem to be seriously doing, whether people might actually respond positively to an entirely different and less cynical communication strategy.

 

[danny la rouge]

Sealand is just waiting for us to disarm the nukes, when we do... god help us all.

Exactly. Have they invaded us while we've had nukes?

It works.

 

[J Ed]

Exactly. Have they invaded us while we've had nukes?

It works.

Costa Rica has no army so they are unable to protect themselves at all, they are constantly invaded by marauding pirates

 

[teqniq]

Arrrrrrrrr.

 

[Belushi]

If we surrender Trident does everyone realise who will still have nukes?

That's right, the French. Let's think about that for a moment.

 

[danny la rouge]

Costa Rica has no army so they are unable to protect themselves at all, they are constantly invaded by marauding pirates

Don't be silly. Nobody invades them because they don't have Marmite.

 

[danny la rouge]

If we surrender Trident does everyone realise who will still have nukes?

That's right, the French. Let's think about that for a moment.

Sorry, you Southerners are on your own there. In Scotland, we like the French and they like us.

Bury my heart at Aubigny.

 

[J Ed]

I'm well up for being an English collaborator in some sort of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact scenario where Scotland and France divvy up England, Northern Ireland and Wales

 

[Pickman's model]

If we surrender Trident does everyone realise who will still have nukes?

That's right, the French. Let's think about that for a moment.

has phildwyer nicked your log in?

 

[Belushi]

has phildwyer nicked your log in?

I've started reading the Telegraph site instead of the Guardian :thumbs :

 

[danny la rouge]

I hope there's a baffled spook in M15 reading this thread this morning trying to work out the current thinking of the domestic extremist left.

 

[Sprocket.]

I hope there's a baffled spook in M15 reading this thread this morning trying to work out the current thinking of the domestic extremist left.

It's true, I am!
Oops.

 

[danny la rouge]

It's true, I am!
Oops.

I'll PM you my new pamphlet: Fields, Marmite Factories and Juggling Workshops.

 

[youngian]

If we surrender Trident does everyone realise who will still have nukes?

That's right, the French. Let's think about that for a moment.

France can at least claim honestly to possess an independent nuclear deterrent. Trident is technically dependent in the long run on American good will. In a post Cold War world where balance of power interests are shifting, its not an implausible scenario that an erratic US president (Cruz, Trump, Jeb Bush!!!) would use Trident support as a bargaining in a future spat with the UK/Europe. Oh and Russia (and therefore its grim allies) know where Trident subs are anyway so its next to useless.

 

[NoXion]

Oh and Russia (and therefore its grim allies) know where Trident subs are anyway so its next to useless.

How do they know?

 

[danny la rouge]

How do they know?

Easy, you leave an iPhone on board with Find iPhone activated.

 

[youngian]

How do they know?

Nimrod cuts 'have allowed Russian submarines to spy on Trident'

Russian submarines are likely to have gathered valuable intelligence on Britain’s nuclear deterrent since the Government scrapped maritime patrol aircraft needed to track them, senior RAF figures warn.

Britain’s lack of submarine-hunting planes after the Nimrod fleet was axed has left Trident vulnerable to Russian spying which could “prejudice the security and effectiveness” of the deterrent, they argue.

Cat and mouse nuclear sub games are as old as their invention. And lets say the Navy conclude that the Russians probably no longer know where Trident subs are due to the latest cloaking and jamming devices in a never ending nuclear escalation game, that is a guestimation. As a consequence Trident is not an ultimate guarantee of secuirty even if you believe in nuclear deterrence.

 

[kebabking]

Nimrod cuts 'have allowed Russian submarines to spy on Trident'


Cat and mouse nuclear sub games are as old as their invention. And lets say the Navy conclude that the Russians probably no longer know where Trident subs are due to the latest cloaking and jamming devices in a never ending nuclear escalation game, that is a guestimation. As a consequence Trident is not an ultimate guarantee of secuirty even if you believe in nuclear deterrence.

the issues the RN have had with Russian SSN's attempting to track the bombers is with the transit, in shallow water, between the firth of Clyde and deeper water where the bombers can disapear on their way to their patrol areas. thats a relatively small part of the sailing period, perhaps two or three days at each end of a 90 day patrol cycle.

its worth noting that the patrol cycle is designed in such a way that the bombers don't swap being the 'live' boat until the new boat is in its deep water patrol area, so having Russian SSN having a firing solution on an outgoing boat in shallow water has no effect on the live boat and its ability to fire.

moreover, just as its a guestimation as to how well - or not - the bombers can be tracked/followed, its also a guestimation on the Russian Navy's part as to how effective it would be at intercepting the missile boats before they could fire, particularly as there are almost always two armed boats at sea, even if only one of them is the designated 'live' boat. no one with half a brain - and the Russians are not stupid - is going to bet their countries survival on the basis of a guestimation and knowing that that guestimation could well be wrong.

fortunately, it appears almost certain that the government will, in the upcoming SDSR, accept that MPA/ASW is a critical capability gap and purchace an 'off the shelf' replacement for Nimrod - the choices being the Japanese P-1, which was at Fairford in the summer and had government minsters and senior RAF officers crawling all over it, and the US Navy's P-8, which has a significant number of RAF and RN ASW people on exchange tours...

 

[killer b]

Ooh, I like how this is going. Can we talk about tanks next?

 

[Artaxerxes]

How do they know?

We outsourced Trident to the lowest bidder, nice Mr Leftinski provides us with accurate figures as to where our subs are.

 

[Sprocket.]

Having Trident is paying 'subs' to a group you cannot afford to be a member of!
Like Unison for example.