Yet more Conservative manifesto rubbish

How can I be asked if I am defending the cuts when I have said the police have a gripe with the government and rightly so Maizie?

Some sre so eager to attack, pity

How funny, Annie.

So, do you believe the policeman?
And if so, what do you think should be done about it?
If we had had that extra 20,000 policemen, we wouldn't need soldiers on the streets now.
Someone in Manchester tweeted that she felt so much safer knowing that May had put soldiers on the streets outside Downing Street and Buck House.

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/soldiers-not-posted-streets-manchester-13088729

Manchester not under any specific threat!

Funny Jen? Do you really think so

Extra police for the salary quoted by the shadow home secretary? Doubt there will many applicants

GracesGran - oh yes let's go back to the horrors of the crusades - how long ago was that - 1,000 years? It was wrong to try to impose Christianity on others then just as it is wrong to try to impose Islam on anyone now. These extremists are not interested in talking, they even kill those who they think are the "wrong" type of Muslim. Perhaps the time will come when they will want to talk - are you suggesting we don't do anything to stop them killing our children in the meantime? Friends who have moved to this country from the Middle East have told me that in their culture attempts to negotiate are seen as a weakness to be exploited.

I suggest that celebgran or roses read
GG2 's excellent post and pick out at least 3 or 4 points. Then put your counter argument in a clear, precise manner so that we can do a straight like for like comparison.
Never mind the dismissive and meaningless 'it would be funny if not so serious'.
Focus on a few of GG2's points and give us your serious opinion.

oldwoman I think that you are muddling exactly what is proposed by JC and many more who think the same.

Talking ones way out if a violent situation, will always be preferable to violence. I think that nearly everyone will agree with that, but no one is suggesting that will always answer. Of course it won't, and appropriate action must be taken to defend the population against such attrocities. To suggest otherwise is not a rational argument.

mcem I would comment on an 'excellent post* if I actually saw one.

oldwoman.... it is quite pointless you, me or anyone else saying anything about Corbyn on this thread, he is regarded as some sort of saint.That in itself is amusing, but yes, scary to think he would ever be in a position of real power.

We cannot allow terrorists to think we will never take action in a Muslim country as we are afraid of any retaliation that may come our way, and regardless of any wars , IS hate all the Western world and make no distinction between us in Europe and the US.

And talking of soldiers on the streets here, after the terrorist attack in Paris the French put 10,000 soldiers on the streets.Nothing to do with police cuts.

No one has said we shouldn't do everything in our power to stop them killing children in this country Oldwoman70 Your friends may consider it a weakness to negotiate and I won't question where this comes from, however that isn't really what is being suggested at present. It is simply that we should not intervene in other countries and go to war because there are repercussions from that that result in attacks in this country, and the best protection we can give our children is not to do this.
If ISIS were bombed out of existence by us tomorrow there would still be supporters all over the world who would step up their campaign of bombings and so make our cities even less safe.

GracesGran - oh yes let's go back to the horrors of the crusades - how long ago was that - 1,000 years? It was wrong to try to impose Christianity on others then just as it is wrong to try to impose Islam on anyone now. These extremists are not interested in talking, they even kill those who they think are the "wrong" type of Muslim. Perhaps the time will come when they will want to talk - are you suggesting we don't do anything to stop them killing our children in the meantime? Friends who have moved to this country from the Middle East have told me that in their culture attempts to negotiate are seen as a weakness to be exploited

If you remember Oldwoman, what you were commenting on was Jeremy Corbyn. I am not sure how this post is relevant to him it seems to be more of a rant against extremists. I am sure you will find we all want to stop extremists being extreme and you could set up a thread to that affect and see who wants to discuss that.

Attack in Manchester = no soldiers on the streets of Manchester.

Nothing to do with police cuts? Rubbish, roses.

They were not using a large number of soldiers and, were possible, they were used for what they call 'static' duty not patrolling the streets but relieving police to get out on to the streets although, of course, they have deployed some armed police.

We do not run our system using the army in the way that many other countries do and we do not arm our police in the way that others do either so there can be no direct comparison with France, etc.

GracesGran -my original post was about Corbyn - with respect I was merely replying to your post

"We will have to talk ABOUT the one group who believe they are so right they can kill everyone who doesn't agree with them - Now what does that remind me of - oh yes, some sections of Christians throughout history."

Some sre so eager to attack, pity

Sorry, Annie. I didn't realise that asking a question was an 'attack'. From the tone of your post it seemed as though you were a) doubting the veracity of the policeman
b)suggesting he had nothing to complain about.

I'm more accustomed to such rhetoric/tone coming from people who are defending whatever is being complained of (such as cuts to police numbers).

I really do find it hard to 'follow' your ideas. Perhaps you're too subtle for me.

I appreciate that Oldwoman but if we go back to your original post:

He has consistently voted against anti-terrorism bills, marched in support of terrorists, refused to denounce terrorists and called them his friends. He is at heart a communist but is afraid to admit it because he knows it will lose him even more support. He is totally out of his depth and would be a complete disaster for UK. Until he was elected leader of the party no-one outside his constituency had even heard of him, he spent years happily sitting on the back benches which is where he should have stayed.

... what I was trying to say is that it is possible to see things and even agree with some or all of what someone like Jeremy Corbyn has done in the past or at least understand his reason for doing it. That is just a different opinion - a different view of the world, not a cause for "vitriol or insults".

Your original post was so aggressive and angry I may not have done this well and I may have lead the thread astray. That was not my intention.

Derailing for a moment.

When we recently caught the ferry home from France, at Cherbourg, there were about three very young, bored looking French soldiers 'guarding' the passport booth. I found that more frightening than reassuring. Silly, I know, but I found myself wondering if one of them might go rogue and start spraying the waiting cars with gunfire... Armed people make me nervous...

I certainly wouldn't want them on our streets on a regular basis Maizie.

I grew up in a garrison town, so it's not as if I'm not used to soldiers..

Maizie, you thought me saying the police had a gripe and rightly so was defending the government who imposed the cuts? And also I was suggesting he had nothing to complain about? Say it if it makes you happy or if you choose not to understand what 'rightly so' means

Oh, let's forget it Annie

What about this 'verbal attack'? I never got to understand just what was said that constituted a verbal attack.

Well Corbyn sums it up for me
www.thecanary.co/2017/05/24/a-23-second-clip-of-a-younger-jeremy-corbyn-has-gone-viral-in-the-wake-of-the-manchester-bombing-video/
Seems so long ago but so relevant now.

If you don't do links he says
Thousands more deaths in Iraq will not make things right. It will set off a spiral of conflict, of hate, of misery, of desperation that will fuel the wars, the conflict, the terrorism, the depression, and the misery of future generations.

I think for many of you who doubt whether Isis will ever come to the table, I think one possible way of tackling them is to talk to those who are funding them. If their income could be cut off it would be enormously helpful in stopping their ability to pursue their death cult ambition.