Could Corbyn sue Cameron for slander after todays speech

[ez8004]

I would argue that if we are not pointing nuclear missiles at another country they would be less likely to point them at us.

 

The rest of your argument really hinges on the likelihood of a strike even if we keep the weapons. I'd say it is practically zero.

 

As for the jobs then I'd suggest that the workers get ready for life after nukes. This is a good primer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese%3F

 

Finally someone who I can actually have a reasoned debate with.

 

It is true that the likelihood is very small, but it is not zero. I am all for abolition of nuclear weapons, but only if everyone else does so as well. Otherwise, we are leaving ourselves very vulnerable. I'll give you an example, Ukraine disarmed itself of all nuclear weapons when it became independent and look at where they are now. A huge portion of their country was annexed by Russia. If Ukraine still had its nuclear deterrent, do you think the Russians would really try and pull off what they have done?

 

As for life after nukes. I would imagine there is a very long while yet as the Successor programme is due to start in late 2016 with the first submarine apparently due in 2028 and there is four to build.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Successor_to_the_UK_Trident_system

 

Got to take this with a pinch of salt as unless you are working on it directly, I don't think the information is very accurate.

[Vague_Boy]

If Ukraine still had its nuclear deterrent, do you think the Russians would really try and pull off what they have done?

By that logic, Iraq should have had nuclear weapons. Then the illegal invasion would never have happened and 144,000 Iraqi civilians would still be alive.

 

Oh wait, wasn't the whole point of the invasion ostensibly based on the idea that Iraq already had Weapons of Mass Destruction in its possession?

 

Not much of a deterrent was it? Almost as if the Americans knew that the WMDs were fictitious all along.

[Eric Arthur]

That's not logic. The question was about an actual post nuclear deterrent Ukraine that is suffering a nuclear armed Russia backed civil war, not Hans Blik trying to find chemical launchers in Iraq.

 

When wars are being carried out by proxy there is a better than ever case for retaining a nuclear deterrent in order to keep conventional war well away from UK shores.

[I1L2T3]

That's not logic. The question was about an actual post nuclear deterrent Ukraine that is suffering a nuclear armed Russia backed civil war, not Hans Blik trying to find chemical launchers in Iraq.

 

When wars are being carried out by proxy there is a better than ever case for retaining a nuclear deterrent in order to keep conventional war well away from UK shores.

 

The deterrence is not to prevent conventional war. It's to prevent nuclear war.

 

I'm curious to know which aggressors would be looking to fight conventional war in the British Isles. Can you honestly envisage this? Seriously? Who?

[Eric Arthur]

Go back and read it again. Take particular note of the word proxy.

[I1L2T3]

Go back and read it again. Take particular note of the word proxy.

 

What I infer from it is that is we didn't fight proxy wars then the wars would be fought nearer or in Britain.

 

Maybe we shouldn't fight proxy wars.

[Anna B]

I've just been watching Camerons speech today in which he refers to Corbyn as "Terrorist sympathising" and it got me wondering whether MP's are allowed to sue each other if comments like that are untrue or if they have some sort of priveledges which prevents this.

 

I'm also curious to know the basis of this statement as it's a pretty odious statement about someone if untrue.

 

Just to return to the original post for a moment, I just wanted to put this on the record.

 

Cameron said: "He (Jeremy Corbyn) thinks that the death of Osama Bin Laden was a tragedy."

 

This was taken out of context and distorted what he actually said.

 

The full text of what Jeremy Corbyn actually said was this:

"This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy upon a tragedy upon a tragedy. The World Trade Centre was a tragedy, the attack upon Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died."

 

Cheap shot Cameron, especially after Corbyn's dignified call for mutual respect.

[tinfoilhat]

Just to return to the original post for a moment, I just wanted to put this on the record.

 

Cameron said: "He (Jeremy Corbyn) thinks that the death of Osama Bin Laden was a tragedy."

 

This was taken out of context and distorted what he actually said.

 

The full text of what Jeremy Corbyn actually said was this:

"This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy upon a tragedy upon a tragedy. The World Trade Centre was a tragedy, the attack upon Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died."

 

Cheap shot Cameron, especially after Corbyn's dignified call for mutual respect.

 

In what world do you think bin ladens death was a tragedy? Tagging on the list of terrorist attacks and political **** ups doesn't make it a tragedy.

[*_ash_*]

Just to return to the original post for a moment, I just wanted to put this on the record.

 

Cameron said: "He (Jeremy Corbyn) thinks that the death of Osama Bin Laden was a tragedy."

 

This was taken out of context and distorted what he actually said.

 

The full text of what Jeremy Corbyn actually said was this:

"This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy upon a tragedy upon a tragedy. The World Trade Centre was a tragedy, the attack upon Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died."

 

Cheap shot Cameron, especially after Corbyn's dignified call for mutual respect.

 

Isn't it a cheap shot (or blatantly false) to say there is that hunger and misery for millions of people in this country?

 

Would you accept being sued for this?

[drummonds]

In what world do you think bin ladens death was a tragedy? Tagging on the list of terrorist attacks and political **** ups doesn't make it a tragedy.

 

what they wanted was for american special forces to lay down their lives to take a prisoner so that he could be put on trial. all this deep inside a hostile country. in the real world the general idea is to complete a mission with the minimum of risk to YOUR OWN forces.