Comments on: Election 2010 – Defence Manifesto (Labour Party)

By: phil Darley

phil Darley — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:34:51 +0000

Peter Arundel, of course you are right. That’s what is so frustrating. I guess one of this website’s aims is to improve the awareness and hence the funding for Defence, but its a bit like p***ing in the wind.

All I would say is that UKIP are the only party who are saying what I want to here, and not just on Defence. Yes they will not form a government, which is a problem with our electoral system. The majority of people in the Contyry could actually want to vore and indeed vote UKIP or Lib Dem for that matter but they want win!!!

The real question is… How to raise defence in the public Consciousness????

By: Euan

Euan — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 23:09:40 +0000

UKIP are looking like my preferred party at this time they are even offering real change and by allowing and supporting other party’s euro sceptics they seem to be not so partisan. They seem to be willing to do what they see as best for the nation rather than best for their party unlike LIB LAB CON. Who knows what this election will bring but I am hopeful for some cage rattling with BNP and UKIP MP’s being elected to mix things up never mind the massive renewal of the members of parliament.

The Conservatives are looking positively Labservative compared to UKIP which seems to be the real Conservative party these days which is not really a good thing if people don’t notice the change. Labour meanwhile are also unsure who they are exactly from Business friendly and a move to the centre to some concerning fascist moves such as identity cards and changes to the law after 9/11 and 7/7.

Ooo! politics. :|

By: Peter Arundel

Peter Arundel — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:31:13 +0000

I don’t want to sound like an apologist for New Labour but I doubt that the armed forces would have done any better under any other party’s rule. Defence is a sector that is ignored, cut back and ‘streamlined’ (ie cut back) by whoever is in power – until there is a crisis, of course . . . Remember 1982? Remember who was cutting defence spending before the Falklands were invaded?
I’m not going to point at any one party and say “They’re the ones to vote for if we want a properly equipped and funded armed forces” because none of them can afford, politically or financially, to take money away from Health, Education, Transport or anything else that affects the Man on The Street directly in order to buy more Chinooks and the pilots to fly them.

UKIP can promise what they like because they know they aren’t going to form a government.

I reckon Paddy Ashdown would have been a good choice for PM but, like UKIP, the Lib Dems will never form a government! :-)

By: Phil Darley

Phil Darley — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:06:23 +0000

To coin a phrase my mum likes to use. Liarbour are “Strangers to the Truth” aka lying bastards!!!

Just seen the UKIP take on Defence, which went alomg the lines of Army increased by 40%, Navy to pre 1990s levels and more combat aircraft for the brillcream boys oops… and girls.

Now that’s more like it.

By: DominicJ

DominicJ — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 06:53:08 +0000

This is nothing new, when in doubt, promise what you promised last time, is Labours standard procedure at the moment.

By: Skippy

Skippy — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 22:13:26 +0000

I’m simply struggling with how at least 2 (and a half) of these even relate to defence issues? But maybe that’s where they’ve been going wrong all this time – mixing defence and dogooding?

By: Euan

Euan — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:16:02 +0000

I simply cannot really comment fully apart from to sum it up as a giant sigh or as my math teacher once said to me “That is Grade A Bullshit”

By: paul g

paul g — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:03:47 +0000

Not that i’m a mistrusting soul, however “vehicles” covers a multitude of areas eg quad bikes could be in there, and i wonder if they have sneaked in the bulldog in those figures.
Doubled the amount of helicopters, my ar$e!! I have to stop grrrr