Corbyn leadership in serious trouble as general warns of mutiny

josephryan1989 · 20-09-2015 5:46pm #1

Corbyn looks like toast as his shadow chancellor John McDonnell was forced to apologise for statements he made in support of the IRA while Corbyn appears to be jettisoning his involvement with the Stop The War Coalition.

An unnamed senior British Army general who served in Northern Ireland during the Troubles has torn strips off the Labour leader for his support for the IRA in the past and his view that Trident, the British nuclear deterrent should be scrapped, and the British military stripped to the bone. The anonymous officer has claimed there will be mutiny in the form of resignations and hints at possible coup.

"The general staff would not allow a prime minister to jeopardise the security of this country and I think people would use whatever means possible, fair or foul to prevent that. You can’t put a maverick in charge of a country’s security."

As Cameron gears up for British involvement in possible military intervention in Syria, senior Labour cabinet figures are believed to have promised to rebel against Corbyn if he opposes military action.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-army-could-stage-mutiny-under-corbyn-says-senior-serving-general-10509742.html

Nodin · 20-09-2015 6:13pm

There hasn't been this level of nonsense in the British press since the 1980's.

josephryan1989 · 20-09-2015 6:37pm

Nodin wrote: »

There hasn't been this level of nonsense in the British press since the 1980's.

You don't believe the general said what he said or that Corbyn faces a leadership challenge?

The Tories are sitting back and eating their popcorn while Labour tears itself to pieces.

It's quite sad that the UK has now no effective political opposition leader because this blithering idiot has been elected Labour leader.

In the past few days he has shown himself to be staggeringly inept and naive.

Iwasfrozen · 20-09-2015 8:31pm

I'm surprised he's lasted this long tbh. It's interesting to watch Labor fall to pieces.

Nodin · 20-09-2015 8:48pm

josephryan1989 wrote: »

You don't believe the general said what he said or that Corbyn faces a leadership challenge?

.............

I've believed the latter since before he was elected. The former I take with a grain of salt.

Nomis21 · 20-09-2015 9:20pm

Corbyn has appointed Neale Coleman and Simon Fletcher to his front bench team. Both moderates who even have the respect of some of the Tories. This is a smart move and shows that he is prepared to listen to all sides of the party.

He has policies and support of the grassroots. People know what they are getting and many like what they are getting. He is not trying to please all the people all the time. He will get support because he is honest and true to his word. UK politics has swung left and right and left again for the past 100 years.

The country will be ready for Corbyn after suffering another five years of Tory government no matter how many loony scare stories appear in the Daily Mail.

A Dub in Glasgo · 20-09-2015 10:06pm

Berserker · 20-09-2015 10:07pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'm surprised he's lasted this long tbh. It's interesting to watch Labor fall to pieces.

All good news for the Tories. They, Labour, are still going to back strikes on Syria despite Corbyn's opposition. Says it all really.

Nomis21 wrote: »

He has policies and support of the grassroots. People know what they are getting and many like what they are getting. He is not trying to please all the people all the time. He will get support because he is honest and true to his word.

That support will die pretty quickly when he comes under pressure. He doesn't have the support of those around him, on a day to day basis. He is toast without that.

josephryan1989 · 20-09-2015 10:15pm

Nomis21 wrote: »

Corbyn has appointed Neale Coleman and Simon Fletcher to his front bench team. Both moderates who even have the respect of some of the Tories. This is a smart move and shows that he is prepared to listen to all sides of the party.

No doubt both Coleman and Fletcher as we speak are plotting with others to oust Corbyn.

He has policies and support of the grassroots. People know what they are getting and many like what they are getting. He is not trying to please all the people all the time. He will get support because he is honest and true to his word. UK politics has swung left and right and left again for the past 100 years.

I'm not sure if you are aware that British public voted in a populist right wing conservative government with a clear majority in parliament.

Instead of maintaining a credible populist left wing position which won Blair election after election, the Labour party has chosen to commit suicide by adopting a hard left leadership.

The country will be ready for Corbyn after suffering another five years of Tory government no matter how many loony scare stories appear in the Daily Mail.

The paper this story comes from is the Independent which is a center-left publication

A Dub in Glasgo · 20-09-2015 10:30pm

josephryan1989 wrote: »

I'm not sure if you are aware that British public voted in a populist right wing conservative government with a clear majority in parliament.

0.369 x 0.661 = 0.244

johnnyskeleton · 20-09-2015 11:08pm

josephryan1989 wrote: »

"The general staff would not allow a prime minister to jeopardise the security of this country and I think people would use whatever means possible, fair or foul to prevent that. You can’t put a maverick in charge of a country’s security."

No wonder he or she spoke on condition of amonymity - thats sedition!

I think the stuff about Corbyn is overblown - he proposes getting rid of Trident and reducing the spend on armed forces. He also proposed trying to conciliate with the Russians etc. Its the perfect counterpoint to the Tories saying they are in favour of a strong foreign policy/defence etc.

Two valid political views. I dont see why people are going so overblown about him being a threat to national security etc.

josephryan1989 · 20-09-2015 11:24pm

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

No wonder he or she spoke on condition of amonymity - thats sedition!

I think the stuff about Corbyn is overblown - he proposes getting rid of Trident and reducing the spend on armed forces. He also proposed trying to conciliate with the Russians etc. Its the perfect counterpoint to the Tories saying they are in favour of a strong foreign policy/defence etc.

Two valid political views. I dont see why people are going so overblown about him being a threat to national security etc.

Unilaterally disarm Britain's nuclear deterrent while a nuclear armed Russia runs rampant in Ukraine and Syria? While nuclear armed China flexes its military muscles in the South China Sea? While Iran seeks nuclear arms? While North Korea threatens the world? Corbyn is off his head.

Conciliate with Russia led by Putin who says one thing and does another and then laughs in your face. The f*cker armed the rebels in Ukraine with ground to air rockets and killed hundreds of people when they shot down an international airliner full of innocent passengers and denied he had anything to do with it.

Conciliate with a Russian tyrant who is league with Assad who is barrel bombing and using chemical weapons against his own people?

Coybyn and his supporters openly praised the IRA - a movement which bombed, shot and kneecapped innocents?

Corbyn is so naive it is dangerous.

If Corbyn tried to do what he says he would be endangering millions of his people and no soldier in good conscience could allow that and would have to mutiny.

Manach · 20-09-2015 11:33pm

I'd not have any articles/books on what constitutes acceptible behaviour from serving military, apart from Shiner's "Man on Horseback", but I reckon the comment is wrong if spoken by a serving military. There is room for some disagreement, as per the early concerns raised by senior staff on conservative defence cuts, but advocating such is too far.

johnnyskeleton · 20-09-2015 11:46pm

josephryan1989 wrote: »

Unilaterally disarm Britain's nuclear deterrent while a nuclear armed Russia runs rampant in Ukraine and Syria? While nuclear armed China flexes its military muscles in the South China Sea? While Iran seeks nuclear arms? While North Korea threatens the world? Corbyn is off his head.

The UK is still part of NATO. Trident is not a deterrent - the US Navy is the deterrent. Trident is the UK's way of saying they are part of the nuclear club. Nuclear weapons would not be used in response to any of the issues you raise re:Russia/Ukraine, China, Iran and North Korea.

Conciliate with Russia led by Putin who says one thing and does another and then laughs in your face. The f*cker armed the rebels in Ukraine with ground to air rockets and killed hundreds of people when they shot down an international airliner full of innocent passengers and denied he had anything to do with it.

Thats no different to what the US, EU and, indeed Cameron have actually done. The sanctions have had little impact. But when Corbyn says that is the correct approach he gets ridiculed. The confusion comes from the fact that in UK politics you are supposed to talk tough or spoof your way out of situations, never frankly talk about them.

Conciliate with a Russian tyrant who is league with Assad who is barrel bombing and using chemical weapons against his own people?

The alternaive is go to war with Russia. The British people surely dont want that.

Coybyn and his supporters openly praised the IRA - a movement which bombed, shot and kneecapped innocents?

Im not aware of Corbyns specific praise of the IRA (although I note he referred to Hamas and Hezbollah as friends durig peace talks). His Shadow Chancellor made comments that were it not for the IRA's armed campaign in the North there probably wouldnt be civil rights, power sharing and a peace process. I think hes correct in that. I dont think he said that he approves of killing or injuring innocent people.

Corbyn is so naive it is dangerous.

How exactly? He's not planning on abolishing the UK Armed forces, he is not proposing to kill people. He is trying to be an agent for peace. Whether you want that as a Prime Minister or whether you want someone who promotes or prepares for war is a democratic choice. But the rhetoric that suggests he is going to surrender the UK to the first person wih a gun is ridiculous. I'm sure Corbyns response to an armed invasion or a terrorist movement in Britain would be the exact same as Cameron, save that hse would have extended the olive branch first.

If Corbyn tried to do what he says he would be endangering millions of his people and no soldier in good conscience could allow that and would have to mutiny.

So if soldiers don't agree with foreign policy they can change it with force? Thank god these unelected angry men are allowed to step in whenever democracy is inconvenient.

Just by the by, I probably wouldnt vote for Corbyn if I was in the UK anyway. I just think this whole threat to national security is a bit silly, and hopefully the UK people are ignoring the Tory hysteria around it.

johnnyskeleton · 20-09-2015 11:50pm

Manach wrote: »

I'd not have any articles/books on what constitutes acceptible behaviour from serving military, apart from Shiner's "Man on Horseback", but I reckon the comment is wrong if spoken by a serving military. There is room for some disagreement, as per the early concerns raised by senior staff on conservative defence cuts, but advocating such is too far.

I don't think its too much of a stretch of the imagination to say that overthrowing the democratically elected government that they have sworn to serve is not acceptable behaviour from an officer and a gentleman.

Manach · 21-09-2015 12:07am

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I don't think its too much of a stretch of the imagination to say that overthrowing the democratically elected government that they have sworn to serve is not acceptable behaviour from an officer and a gentleman.

Sure, and as part of said elected government there should be an actioniable and clear legal offence that can be distingushed between this other prior military stakeholder grumblings?

Berserker · 21-09-2015 12:19am

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Im not aware of Corbyns specific praise of the IRA (although I note he referred to Hamas and Hezbollah as friends durig peace talks). His Shadow Chancellor made comments that were it not for the IRA's armed campaign in the North there probably wouldnt be civil rights, power sharing and a peace process. I think hes correct in that. I dont think he said that he approves of killing or injuring innocent people.

Given the fact that these comments came from his right hand man, I would hazard a guess that he doesn't disagree with the sentiment. Also, I would say that the changes in Northern Ireland came about as a result of dialogue. The IRA injured and killed innocent people for decades prior to those discussions and it only ever lead to more violence. Finally, if he doesn't openly condemn the likes of Hamas, Hezbollah and the IRA then he must approve of the atrocities that they committed.

Eugene Norman · 21-09-2015 12:34am

josephryan1989 wrote: »

Corbyn looks like toast as his shadow chancellor John McDonnell was forced to apologise for statements he made in support of the IRA while Corbyn appears to be jettisoning his involvement with the Stop The War Coalition.

An unnamed senior British Army general who served in Northern Ireland during the Troubles has torn strips off the Labour leader for his support for the IRA in the past and his view that Trident, the British nuclear deterrent should be scrapped, and the British military stripped to the bone. The anonymous officer has claimed there will be mutiny in the form of resignations and hints at possible coup.

"The general staff would not allow a prime minister to jeopardise the security of this country and I think people would use whatever means possible, fair or foul to prevent that. You can’t put a maverick in charge of a country’s security."

As Cameron gears up for British involvement in possible military intervention in Syria, senior Labour cabinet figures are believed to have promised to rebel against Corbyn if he opposes military action.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-army-could-stage-mutiny-under-corbyn-says-senior-serving-general-10509742.html

That general needs to be fired and jailed for life. He is basically threatening a coup.

As for the British military. Invading Iraq, and recently Libya ( the latter at the request of the necrophilliac pig sodomizing PM ) has destabilised Europe far more than the IRA

Eugene Norman · 21-09-2015 12:36am

Berserker wrote: »

Given the fact that these comments came from his right hand man, I would hazard a guess that he doesn't disagree with the sentiment. Also, I would say that the changes in Northern Ireland came about as a result of dialogue. The IRA injured and killed innocent people for decades prior to those discussions and it only ever lead to more violence. Finally, if he doesn't openly condemn the likes of Hamas, Hezbollah and the IRA then he must approve of the atrocities that they committed.

Why would anybody care about Hamas and Hezbollah unless they were Israeli?

The changes in Northern Ireland and the dialogue needed Labour Party members to go off the reservation sometimes.

I doubt anybody under the age of 50 cares.

feargale · 21-09-2015 1:20am

Nodin wrote: »

I've believed the latter since before he was elected. The former I take with a grain of salt.

Why? Didn't it happen before? Remember the Curragh mutiny? A touch of Egypt! I've always wondered if a British P.M.'s power stopped when the military said: "that's not possible."

StonyIron · 21-09-2015 1:28am

The army acting politically is a very dangerous precedent, usually only seen in unstable developing nations with a history of dictatorship.

Normal procedure now would be the Military Police would investigate and the person who made those statements could well be facing court-martial.

Walter E GO · 21-09-2015 2:09am

At least Corbyn didn't go Tory and have sexual relations with a pig. Disturbing news coming out about David Cameron and a pigs head.

johnnyskeleton · 21-09-2015 3:36am

Walter E GO wrote: »

At least Corbyn didn't go Tory and have sexual relations with a pig. Disturbing news coming out about David Cameron and a pigs head.

Mod note:

Please read the charter re: standards of contribution before posting again. Apart from anything else, I fail to see how it is in any way relevant to the topic at hand.

Nichard Dixon · 21-09-2015 4:25am

josephryan1989 wrote: »

Coybyn and his supporters openly praised the IRA - a movement which bombed, shot and kneecapped innocents?

Corbyn is so naive it is dangerous.

.

Plenty of other Labour leaders praised the British army, which bombed and shot innocents, although to be fair they rarely kneecap people,

demfad · 21-09-2015 1:23pm

I think rumours of Corbyn's demise are being propagated by the big British media outlets. He is a threat to the established order clearly.

I'm interested to see how it will play out. He was democratically elected by the Labour party. Clearly the British establishment has little interest in democratic representation when their own selfish interests are challenged.

Lemming · 21-09-2015 1:30pm

demfad wrote: »

I think rumours of Corbyn's demise are being propagated by the big British media outlets. He is a threat to the established order clearly.

I'm interested to see how it will play out. He was democratically elected by the Labour party. Clearly the British establishment has little interest in democratic representation when their own selfish interests are challenged.

The Tories haven't had to lift a finger to attack Corbyn. His own rather colourful history & current actions & decisions are what is fueling the media frenzy. The man is the PM-in-waiting and people are curious to know who he is and what he stands for. The position he's been elected to is very, very visible to the public eye. The media are doing what the media do; report the news that people want to read about, and the fact that we have people whinging about it shows just how unprepared/naieve they were for the reality of what was going to happen (and is now happening).

demfad · 21-09-2015 2:56pm

Lemming wrote: »

The Tories haven't had to lift a finger to attack Corbyn. .....

That's not quite true. David Cameron immediately found it necessary to attack him by tweeting that the Labour party 'was a danger to National security and your family's security'. This is an outrageous comment for the PM of any state to make. Camerons role is to protect the security of his State. He demeans that role by using it to effect political advantage. People are so used to this that they can't spot Cameron's complete absence of integrity. If Corbyn survives long enough it will become more apparent.

NoCrackHaving · 21-09-2015 4:05pm

StonyIron wrote: »

The army acting politically is a very dangerous precedent, usually only seen in unstable developing nations with a history of dictatorship.

Normal procedure now would be the Military Police would investigate and the person who made those statements could well be facing court-martial.

In fact the last time I can think of a military coup in western Europe was during the revolt of the Greek colonels, a long, long time ago now. The chances of a military rising in the UK are so small as to not be worth talking about.

hmmm · 21-09-2015 4:16pm

Personally I think the biggest blow on Corbyn this week was the suggestion that he was a "puritan". After watching his behaviour over a number of weeks, there was something about his dour, excessively serious, criticise-everything, miserable attitude that I couldn't quite characterise - but "puritan" is a great description.

At the moment, his merry band of 20 something supporters are praising him for bringing "seriousness" back to UK politics, but will they have the attention span to diligently watch PM's questions to find out what Mary from Brixton has to say about housing policy week after week? Doubtful.

I expect the "puritan" tag to stick and increase in potency. Yes of course we expect our politicians to take their jobs seriously, but we also like them to be slightly imperfect humans we could have a pint with.

REXER · 21-09-2015 4:20pm

Eugene Norman wrote: »

That general needs to be fired and jailed for life. He is basically threatening a coup.

As for the British military. Invading Iraq, and recently Libya ( the latter at the request of the necrophilliac pig sodomizing PM ) has destabilised Europe far more than the IRA

Whats all the huffing and puffing about? Corbyn is not the elected leader of the United Kingdom! :rolleyes:

brevity · 21-09-2015 4:21pm

Whatever about his policies, the way the right wing press turned on Corbyn is disconcerting.

Corbyn leadership in serious trouble as general warns of mutiny

Comments