The Politics Thread

[Worthy4England]

The only reason anyone has heard of the cat, is because the judge cracked a joke about it. They do that. Mainly coz they can, and people have to laugh.

Aye, just you try doing it, instead of the judge. Then you find out what a set of humourless bastards they are.

[TANGODANCER]

The only reason anyone has heard of the cat, is because the judge cracked a joke about it. They do that. Mainly coz they can, and people have to laugh.

Aye, just you try doing it, instead of the judge. Then you find out what a set of humourless bastards they are.

Something about, "And a little titter ran around the court" is digging at my mind somewhere.

[Prufrock]

The only reason anyone has heard of the cat, is because the judge cracked a joke about it. They do that. Mainly coz they can, and people have to laugh.

Aye, just you try doing it, instead of the judge. Then you find out what a set of humourless bastards they are.

Not planning on doing! Though you hear stories of barristers having competitions to see what they can get passed his lordship !

[Hoboh]

A couple of points Pru

I apologise for calling you thick, clearly you are not and one should remember not to type exactly what one is thinking.

I am not going to fall out over pussy (theres enough to go round anyways)

Please oh please don't tell me the cat had fook all to do with the libdems wife!!! (oh and that should lose them a few votes on the leader board )

[thebish]

not strictly-speaking "politics" - but saves opening an un-necessary new thread..

for those unfamiliar with opendemocracy.net - it's a great place to go if you want to hear serious people from many different international backgrounds discuss and debate topics thoroughly and seriously - it gets the thebish official seal of approval as a place to read opinion on the news...

anyway - they have a very interesting article on "bombing" - which starts like this:

The problems with remote-controlled warfare are legion. The human operator ‘is terribly remote from the consequences of his actions; he is likely to be sitting in an air-conditioned trailer, hundreds of miles from the area of battle.’ He evaluates ‘target signatures’ captured by various sensor systems that ‘no more represent human beings than the tokens in a board-type war game.’

The rise of this new ‘American way of bombing’, as it’s been called, has two particularly serious consequences. First, ‘through its isolation of the military actor from his target, automated warfare diminishes the inhibitions that could formerly be expected on the individual level in the exercise of warfare’. In short, killing is made casual. Secondly, once the risk of combat is transferred to the target, it becomes much easier for the state to go to war. Domestic audiences are disengaged from the violence waged in their name: ‘Remote-controlled warfare reduces the need for the public to confront the consequences of military action abroad.’

All familiar stuff, you might think, except that these warnings were not prompted by the appearance of Predators and Reapers in the skies over Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia or Yemen. They appeared in Harper’s Magazine in June 1972, the condensed results of a study of the US air war in Indochina by a group of scholar-activists at Cornell University.1 As they suggest, crucial elements of today’s ‘drone wars’ were assembled during the US bombing of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. There were three of them: drones, real-time visual reconnaissance, and the electronic battlefield.

continued here: http://www.opendemocracy.net/derek-greg ... %2006%3a30

this was thought-provoking, I thought... "If this is a dismal case of ‘back to the future’, we could do worse than attend to the voices from the past. Critics were concerned at the expansion of the physical space of war and the contraction of the moral space of war."

[Prufrock]

But they're shit. Any basic anti aircraft defence can shoot them down without breaking a sweat.

As for the question of remoteness, how is it different than firing a missile, or dropping a bomb. Don't see the victims there either.

The question of making it easy for the state to go to war is answered above. You don't need much more than a radar and a slingshot to shoot them down, they're only any use against folk hiding in mountains, like yon Al-Awlaki.

[Hoboh]

But they're shit. Any basic anti aircraft defence can shoot them down without breaking a sweat.

As for the question of remoteness, how is it different than firing a missile, or dropping a bomb. Don't see the victims there either.

The question of making it easy for the state to go to war is answered above. You don't need much more than a radar and a slingshot to shoot them down, they're only any use against folk hiding in mountains, like yon Al-Awlaki.

Ummm wait till one of these gets a reliable remote system!



B-2 Spirit "Stealth Bomber"

[William the White]

Had no idea you were into origami, hoboh. Looks nice though. Did you paint it yourself as well?

[Hoboh]

Had no idea you were into origami, hoboh. Looks nice though. Did you paint it yourself as well?

William it frightens me as well. To be honest my desire is to not need things like that, you and I have different routes to a deccent sociaty, the end game is the same!

[Worthy4England]

I suspect an interesting few days in store for the Home Sec. Should be interesting when Brodie Clark meets the Home Affairs Committee, without the benefit of Ministerial instruction..

[thebish]

I suspect an interesting few days in store for the Home Sec. Should be interesting when Brodie Clark meets the Home Affairs Committee, without the benefit of Ministerial instruction..

when you are home secretary and your best defense is - I had no idea what was going on on my watch, then people WILL ask questions!

[Lord Kangana]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC3NcE_r ... re=related" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I suspect an interesting few days in store for the Home Sec. Should be interesting when Brodie Clark meets the Home Affairs Committee, without the benefit of Ministerial instruction..

when you are home secretary and your best defense is - I had no idea what was going on on my watch, then people WILL ask questions!

Not just saying this because it's a Conservative Home Secretary (though I don't think May is a good one), but my observation from the last 15 years is that the job is just too big. I also think, having worked with them on their IT contracts, that the department itself is too unwieldy.

[Lord Kangana]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o3H0AtEylg&NR=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Prufrock]

She's an 'orrible witch, so I hope she fecks off, but I think Mummy is right, they do seem to be responsible for shiiiiiiiiit loads of stuff.

[Hoboh]

Oh give over "home" means here "Forign" means there, what is the problem? Divide it up and you run the risk of outsiders taking over little bits of it by commitee and feck all will ever be done!
Thing wrong is Judges should be hired and fired by elected representitives not through the "old boy brigade" rife in our legal system, this system needs massive reforms such as lay judges who can be guided as to the letter of the law in much the same way as magistrates, not just be moved up from inside the system. Folk may have more faith that justice was being done then

[Zulus Thousand of em]

I suspect an interesting few days in store for the Home Sec. Should be interesting when Brodie Clark meets the Home Affairs Committee, without the benefit of Ministerial instruction..

when you are home secretary and your best defense is - I had no idea what was going on on my watch, then people WILL ask questions!

It's a pity that the Labour front bench, ably led into battle by Mister Bean, appear to be totally incapable of capitalising on the Tories discomfort on this one.

Well, no it's not really.

[William the White]

I suspect an interesting few days in store for the Home Sec. Should be interesting when Brodie Clark meets the Home Affairs Committee, without the benefit of Ministerial instruction..

when you are home secretary and your best defense is - I had no idea what was going on on my watch, then people WILL ask questions!

It's a pity that the Labour front bench, ably led into battle by Mister Bean, appear to be totally incapable of capitalising on the Tories discomfort on this one.

Well, no it's not really.

I wouldn't speak too soon, comrade... The full extent of ms 'I kid you not' 's story telling is yet to be revealed, this may have a little way to run... It's the slow drip of incompetence that wears you down for the electorate... And the Tories are doing very nicely in this regard, very nicely indeed... And as for Mr Bean, an electorate prepared to offer a vote to Cameron with a shrug might well might be able to give him up with a shrug and certainly there's an interesting question as to which way Liberal voters might split...

[Lord Kangana]

I hadn't apprecited that Brodie Clark will be taking this to court for constructive dismissal. I also hadn't appreciated that Alan Johnson, one of the minority in the house that I have a bit of liking for, is to support him. She may end up being the second resignation before the month is out.

[thebish]

does anyone remember Big Dave standing up in the the commons after the riots and reassuring businesses and homeowners that the gov. would pay out even if they weren't insured in places affected by rioting? He said they could be reassured of quick help with minimal red-tape to get their lives and businesses back on track immediately. the even bigger Pickles said the same only louder....

well... how is that working out??

Riot-hit businesses have so far received less than £4,000 in compensation from the Government despite putting in £250 million in claims, it was reported today.

full article here: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... -so-far.do

all marth no trarrrzis....