TRUCKING #58 VANEROO BOOGALOO

[Smitty-48]

Isn't he talking about total unilateral nuclear disarmament though?

Sure, but that's not really going to happen, I'm talking about what they should really do, after all that sort of nonsense goes nowhere.

Are there a large percentage of British citizens who are actually for getting rid of nukes?

When push comes to shove, the military would override them, you're not going to last long in government, against an insurgency from the security forces, they can bring you down, so the more realistic option, is to sell the military on a more realistic and cost effective nuclear force structure, then you would have them onside.

[Smitty-48]

Bear in mind, the politicians do not actually run the government, the middle management runs the government the politicians are just figureheads, but the middle management would not be opposed to sensible reforms, they're only going to buck the rider if you try to be a loonie, and realistically, no matter what you promise to your loonie base, once you are in government, you're going to have to chuck all that under the bus anyways, and then you're just a liar, so why bother? You could actually just snag the middle ground and rule forever by being realistic, playing the loonie card in desperation, is just a recipe for being a lame duck.

[Smitty-48]

Corbyn has a plan. What does May have? She's weak. Blood is in the water, labour is in ascendency. I'm a #CorbynCruiser now.

Getting rid of May, then giving the UK a taste of PM Corbyn, is just what the Tories need to clear out the dead wood, and then incite the Brits to elect a Thatcher 2.0 next, so whatevs, I'm fine with it. #Goaheadandblowyourselvesupleftyloonies

[TheReal_ND]

This guy gets it. Creative destruction. It has to get worse. Much worse.

[jbird4049]

This is my issue with a lot of liberals. They are more worried about some imam wagging their finger at them than at the security of their taxpaying citizens. They are upset when the government takes actions to prevent further attacks, but are fine when it oversteps its authority to prevent "hate speech." To his credit, liberal Glenn Greenwald complains about security measures, but he also has written a lot about protecting free speech. Many liberals I talked to in the past were fine with open immigration and were fine with hate speech laws, but are aghast at any suggestion that muslims were behind violence and fail mentally to link the two. If I had to pick between restricting immigration (limiting freedom of non citizens) vs. living in a police state (restricting freedom of citizens) I'd pick the former every time.

Unfortunately for Europe, due to the nature of its society, it is sometimes necessary for the military to make their presence known and restore order in the event of a terrorist attack. This is not malevolent. It is what every government in history has done when the peace is threatened.

The thing (and this also in response to both you and Smitty's next few posts) is there is either freedom of speech or there is not. There is either the the rule of law or there is not. Either the people rule via their chosen government, or they do not.

For years, the cries of safety, save us from the evil people! Have been used to justify ever stronger, harsher, and yet ineffective methods of protection. Those methods will be useful in having the government control us. We all the parts needed for a true authoritarian police state. It just has not quite jelled, or gotten an effective user(s) of the system.

We have done exactly what Osama bin Laden wanted us to do. Started a war with an entire religion, and started a war against a tactic, which can not be won and therefore will never end. We will kill our values and destroy our economy and government in doing so.

So it looks like Al-Qaeda is going to win after all.

[Alexander PhiAlipson]

So it looks like Al-Qaeda is going to win after all.

Aaaaand... what do they win?
Is it a fabulous vacation? The his and her jet-skis? Ooooor, is it a NEW CAR?

[TheReal_ND]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/car ... /73621844/

A new Toyota Tundra!

[heydaralon]

This is my issue with a lot of liberals. They are more worried about some imam wagging their finger at them than at the security of their taxpaying citizens. They are upset when the government takes actions to prevent further attacks, but are fine when it oversteps its authority to prevent "hate speech." To his credit, liberal Glenn Greenwald complains about security measures, but he also has written a lot about protecting free speech. Many liberals I talked to in the past were fine with open immigration and were fine with hate speech laws, but are aghast at any suggestion that muslims were behind violence and fail mentally to link the two. If I had to pick between restricting immigration (limiting freedom of non citizens) vs. living in a police state (restricting freedom of citizens) I'd pick the former every time.

Unfortunately for Europe, due to the nature of its society, it is sometimes necessary for the military to make their presence known and restore order in the event of a terrorist attack. This is not malevolent. It is what every government in history has done when the peace is threatened.

The thing (and this also in response to both you and Smitty's next few posts) is there is either freedom of speech or there is not. There is either the the rule of law or there is not. Either the people rule via their chosen government, or they do not.

For years, the cries of safety, save us from the evil people! Have been used to justify ever stronger, harsher, and yet ineffective methods of protection. Those methods will be useful in having the government control us. We all the parts needed for a true authoritarian police state. It just has not quite jelled, or gotten an effective user(s) of the system.

We have done exactly what Osama bin Laden wanted us to do. Started a war with an entire religion, and started a war against a tactic, which can not be won and therefore will never end. We will kill our values and destroy our economy and government in doing so.

So it looks like Al-Qaeda is going to win after all.

I love it when people say "This is what AQ wanted to do." As though just because we take a more realistic policy we get defeated. You do realize that if we let in the entire middle east and changed our demographics to muslims overnight, AND withdrew our entire military from the middle east, we'd still get attacked right? Take a look at Germany. How many foreign wars are they fighting on muslim soil? How repressive are their immigration policies?
Also, you take a very strange view on freedom, as though it is this free hanging Platonic form that just happens to exist outside of human reality. The reason that freedom exists and rights exist, is because of the power of the state. Without the state and security forces guaranteeing it, freedom would not exist, and your freedom would come from your ability to project power personally. Since you have said you are a pacifist, the absence of the state would leave you with no freedom or rights. Maybe it would be great if people just ignored terrorist attacks. Mathematically, you have a greater chance dying of a coronary. Unfortunately, thats not how people, gov'ts, and the media treats this stuff. Terrorism represents a threat to the peace, and this sadly, more than protecting freedoms, is the chief purpose of the government. Try reading some Hobbes. If people do not believe that their government can keep the peace, they will opt for a new government, leading to even less peace. You can dispute these conclusions all you want, but every government in history reacts this way when there is a threat to order.

Moreover, I find it pretty unusual that you are pontificating on freedom when people like you on the left are the first to advocate ridiculous hatespeech laws against speaking ill of Islam. I'm guessing you were for Merkel's plan of letting in the Syrian Refugees as well. Isn't it interesting how that policy seems to have led to all kinds of restrictions in speech and mobility for European citizens?

[Montegriffo]

Son of hire car company has been released without charge over Facebook posts.

[TheReal_ND]

LAND OF THE FREE (kinda)