[VIDEO] British soldiers filmed shooting Jeremy Corbyn poster in shooting range

[MenInG]

British soldiers filmed shooting Jeremy Corbyn poster in shooting range

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Video has emerged of soldiers on a shooting range in Kabul firing at a target of Jeremy Corbyn. MOD confirms it as legit: <a href="https://t.co/qOr84Aiivj">pic.twitter.com/qOr84Aiivj</a></p>— Alistair Bunkall (@AliBunkallSKY) <a href="https://twitter.com/AliBunkallSKY/status/1113352300037398528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Four soldiers were filmed aiming guns and firing at a poster of Jeremy Corbyn.

They can be seen shooting at the Labour leader, then smiling afterwards as they check how many shots reached their target.

Snapchat-style footage captioned, ‘Happy with that’, ends with a close up of Mr Corbyn’s face, now riddled with holes.

The corner of the video is marked 3 para (a shortened version of 3rd battalion parachute regiment).

An Army spokesperson said. ‘We are aware of a video circulating on social media, this behaviour is totally unacceptable and falls well below the high standards the Army expects.

‘A full investigation has been launched.’

The footage was captured in Kabul, Afghanistan.

It is understood it was a non-lethal hardened wax substance aimed and fired at the image instead of metal bullets, with the incident taking place in the past few days.

The behaviour of soldiers who used an image of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn as target practice is ‘alarming and unacceptable’, a party spokesman has said.

The video was also shared on Twitter by @StingRaeSpec, but has now been deleted.

On his account he claims to be part of the Royal Navy, and tweets mainly about charity work helping veterans.

When we asked him to comment on the video, we were blocked from viewing his tweets.

It was also shared by an account in the name of ex-soldier Trevor Coult – who was awarded a Military Cross – last night.

It included a comment: ‘Not looking good for a Labour leader” alongside a crying laughing emoji.

He later claimed the video was fake. Twitter user Zach Martin responded: ‘Almost certain this is illegal but even if it isn’t against the law for uniformed military personnel to threaten death [on] a Member of Parliament, it’s undeniably f****** terrifying.

‘Gentle reminder that Jo Cox was murdered by a “British Patriot” less than three years ago.’

Sources earlier claimed the video could have been photoshopped, saying soldiers never fired at faces while training and only used ordinary targets.

A spokesman for the Parachute Regiment declined to comment.

Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2019/04/03/brit...-jeremy-corbyn-poster-shooting-range-9100927/

 

[KingKhanWC]

Disturbing to say the least.

I hope the army punishes them quickly and they never get to hold a gun again.

 

[Technics 1210]

The irony being that Corbyn is pretty much a pacifist and if PM, would never send them to war.

 

[Markhor]

When the right wing media has spent years demonising Corbyn as a national security threat, anti-British and anti-military then are these incidents any surprise ?

 

[KingKhanWC]

When the right wing media has spent years demonising Corbyn as a national security threat, anti-British and anti-military then are these incidents any surprise ?

I thought after the brutal murder of Jo Cox the media would be more sensible but I guess their agenda against Corbyn is too strong to worry about politicians being attacked.

 

[Minnowbasher]

UK meh bhi Fauj ki saazish

 

[Donal Cozzie]

Parachute Regiment eh.

Least it wasnt unarmed civil rights protesters. Then they wouldve been awarded medals for bravery

 

[SensiblePakFan]

He's anti-war, ofcourse they hate him.

 

[Robert]

When the right wing media has spent years demonising Corbyn as a national security threat, anti-British and anti-military then are these incidents any surprise ?

He is a national security threat.

He believed Russia over Salisbury instead of MI5. He will pull our troops out of Estonia and do nothing if the Russians invade there. He will gut our already inadequate armed forces so that we can no longer intercept Russian recce planes and submarines from probing our territory. We may even quit NATO.

There isn’t going to be a military coup if Corbyn becomes PM. We used to throw darts at pictures of Thatcher at uni, but (this is the crucial thing) we didn’t actually throw stuff at her. Top Gear shot up cutouts of The Stig. It was puerile, not a murder threat.

If this was 2003 and footage emerged of cutouts of Blair being shot up by soldiers, I bet you’d feel differently.

 

[Robert]

The irony being that Corbyn is pretty much a pacifist and if PM, would never send them to war.

The problem with pacifism is that it makes war more likely not less. See Chamberlain in 1940.

 

[Markhor]

If this was 2003 and footage emerged of cutouts of Blair being shot up by soldiers, I bet you’d feel differently.

No I wouldn't. The military should stay the hell away from politics.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

He is a national security threat.

He believed Russia over Salisbury instead of MI5. He will pull our troops out of Estonia and do nothing if the Russians invade there. He will gut our already inadequate armed forces so that we can no longer intercept Russian recce planes and submarines from probing our territory. We may even quit NATO.

There isn’t going to be a military coup if Corbyn becomes PM. We used to throw darts at pictures of Thatcher at uni, but (this is the crucial thing) we didn’t actually throw stuff at her. Top Gear shot up cutouts of The Stig. It was puerile, not a murder threat.

If this was 2003 and footage emerged of cutouts of Blair being shot up by soldiers, I bet you’d feel differently.

You make him sound like a Russian plant. I actually don't see anything wrong with a pacifist Britain. We are a remote island more similar to Denmark or Sweden than the rest of Europe. What would Russia gain by threatening us? If we stay out of their business they might stay out of ours. They would probably have their hands full throwing their weight around in their own region. Our priority should be to keep Wales, Scotland and Ireland in line as we always did throughout history. These are our local battles now that the Great Empire has ended.

 

[Robert]

You make him sound like a Russian plant. I actually don't see anything wrong with a pacifist Britain. We are a remote island more similar to Denmark or Sweden than the rest of Europe. What would Russia gain by threatening us? If we stay out of their business they might stay out of ours. They would probably have their hands full throwing their weight around in their own region. Our priority should be to keep Wales, Scotland and Ireland in line as we always did throughout history. These are our local battles now that the Great Empire has ended.

I don’t think he is a Russian plant; merely a useful idiot.

Because our allies rely on us to uphold their freedom. They shelter under Trident. Our new big carriers alarm the Kremlin. If we go pacifist the Baltic states will get rolled in short order. Maybe part of Poland too.

 

[Robert]

No I wouldn't. The military should stay the hell away from politics.

“The military” is staying away. We are talking about one section of squaddies making a bad taste joke, not Night of The Generals.

 

[Technics 1210]

He is a national security threat.

He believed Russia over Salisbury instead of MI5. He will pull our troops out of Estonia and do nothing if the Russians invade there. He will gut our already inadequate armed forces so that we can no longer intercept Russian recce planes and submarines from probing our territory. We may even quit NATO.

There isn’t going to be a military coup if Corbyn becomes PM. We used to throw darts at pictures of Thatcher at uni, but (this is the crucial thing) we didn’t actually throw stuff at her. Top Gear shot up cutouts of The Stig. It was puerile, not a murder threat.

If this was 2003 and footage emerged of cutouts of Blair being shot up by soldiers, I bet you’d feel differently.

Nope. Corbyn never said he believed the Russians. All he said was he wanted absolute evidence.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-43...oning-corbyn-wants-absolute-evidence-of-guilt

Now what if the poster was one of May or the Queen? There would be a public uproar no doubt.

 

[Robert]

Nope. Corbyn never said he believed the Russians. All he said was he wanted absolute evidence.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-43...oning-corbyn-wants-absolute-evidence-of-guilt

Now what if the poster was one of May or the Queen? There would be a public uproar no doubt.

Don’t be fooled. This man instinctively takes the anti-British position. He’s a professional contrarian. Even if incontrovertible proof came along he would find an emotional reason to reject it.

If the squaddies shot up a cutout of May then I bet a lot of people would cheer. They would never shoot up a pic of the Queen, because they are sworn to her.

 

[CricketCartoons]

I don’t think he is a Russian plant; merely a useful idiot.

Because our allies rely on us to uphold their freedom. They shelter under Trident. Our new big carriers alarm the Kremlin. If we go pacifist the Baltic states will get rolled in short order. Maybe part of Poland too.

Great insight into the native view. Stands out from the echo chamber.

 

[Robert]

Great insight into the native view. Stands out from the echo chamber.

Thanks but I don’t believe I qualify as any more ‘native’ than many here. I merely have a different historical perspective.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Thanks but I don’t believe I qualify as any more ‘native’ than many here. I merely have a different historical perspective.

And that is because you are tied to this land in a more organic way (which is what I mean by native).

 

[Robert]

And that is because you are tied to this land in a more organic way (which is what I mean by native).

You make me sound like a taproot.

 

[James]

Dismal. The soldiers should be reprimanded.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

And that is because you are tied to this land in a more organic way (which is what I mean by native).

Not all natives believe Britain should be a world power, my belief is that Corbyn is the more organic native in that he is concerned less with projecting power across the globe, and prefers to keep British policies localised to the immediate surrounds of this fair isle. Hence his support for Brexit so we would get less interference from Brussels. We Brits used to view those such as France and Germany as our traditional foes as they are the ones who pose a more immediate threat to our borders.

 

[the Great Khan]

I don’t think he is a Russian plant; merely a useful idiot.

Because our allies rely on us to uphold their freedom. They shelter under Trident. Our new big carriers alarm the Kremlin. If we go pacifist the Baltic states will get rolled in short order. Maybe part of Poland too.

erm none of that is going to happen. You are aware if it does it will kick off a nuclear war right? its not happening and your being fooled. i suggest you take some time and read up on military technology and geopolitics. As a british voter you should ensure your clued up with the difference between an SD10 and an AMRAAM. Or a F35 and a tornado..

 

[Robert]

erm none of that is going to happen. You are aware if it does it will kick off a nuclear war right? its not happening and your being fooled. i suggest you take some time and read up on military technology and geopolitics. As a british voter you should ensure your clued up with the difference between an SD10 and an AMRAAM. Or a F35 and a tornado..

No, you are quite wrong there. It will not kick off nuclear war. The only thing that will do that is a nuclear attack. Nuclear weapons deter the use of nuclear weapons but not that of conventional weapons. Deterrence has to be matched at every level. You didn’t see UK nuking Argentina in 1982 did you? Withdrawal of a ship made it look like UK had no political will to defend her territory. Likewise, Russia could roll into an inadequately defended Latvia and say to NATO ‘OK, nuke us’ and NATO would not dare as it would mean MAD. Russia will have land-grabbed part of Latvia and NATO will have failed to prevent them.

Putin is very clever at operating below a level of aggression that will trigger Article 5 declaration. Destabilisation of the rule of law by fomenting strikes and protests will give him the excuse to say “ethnic Russians are in danger” and he will move troops in to protect them. See Georgia, see Crimea.

 

[the Great Khan]

No, you are quite wrong there. It will not kick off nuclear war. The only thing that will do that is a nuclear attack. Nuclear weapons deter the use of nuclear weapons but not that of conventional weapons. Deterrence has to be matched at every level. You didn’t see UK nuking Argentina in 1982 did you? Withdrawal of a ship made it look like UK had no political will to defend her territory. Likewise, Russia could roll into an inadequately defended Latvia and say to NATO ‘OK, nuke us’ and NATO would not dare as it would mean MAD. Russia will have land-grabbed part of Latvia and NATO will have failed to prevent them.

Putin is very clever at operating below a level of aggression that will trigger Article 5 declaration. Destabilisation of the rule of law by fomenting strikes and protests will give him the excuse to say “ethnic Russians are in danger” and he will move troops in to protect them. See Georgia, see Crimea.

still not happening. NATO are in the area..he will have to come up with an agreement with NATO to land troops there. Its alarmist nonsense. The reason he went for Crimea was strategic. its a long game..

 

[KingKhanWC]

He is a national security threat.

He believed Russia over Salisbury instead of MI5. He will pull our troops out of Estonia and do nothing if the Russians invade there. He will gut our already inadequate armed forces so that we can no longer intercept Russian recce planes and submarines from probing our territory. We may even quit NATO.

There isn’t going to be a military coup if Corbyn becomes PM. We used to throw darts at pictures of Thatcher at uni, but (this is the crucial thing) we didn’t actually throw stuff at her. Top Gear shot up cutouts of The Stig. It was puerile, not a murder threat.

If this was 2003 and footage emerged of cutouts of Blair being shot up by soldiers, I bet you’d feel differently.

Sorry Robert but this is a very poor post from you. No condemnation but comes across as a defence of these idiot soldiers. The far right in the UK and Europe is growing and I can understand why if intelligent people such as yourself have fallen for this nonsense regarding Corbyn.

I advise you and everyone to watch this by Owen Jones.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Not all natives believe Britain should be a world power, my belief is that Corbyn is the more organic native in that he is concerned less with projecting power across the globe, and prefers to keep British policies localised to the immediate surrounds of this fair isle. Hence his support for Brexit so we would get less interference from Brussels. We Brits used to view those such as France and Germany as our traditional foes as they are the ones who pose a more immediate threat to our borders.

The enemies always want patriots to become soft and pacifists, so that they can continue with their merry ways. UK and every country needs people to toughen up and not be pansies because a sheet of printed paper was used for some shooting practice.

 

[Robert]

still not happening. NATO are in the area..he will have to come up with an agreement with NATO to land troops there. Its alarmist nonsense. The reason he went for Crimea was strategic. its a long game..

But if Britain pulls out, USA might do the same. Then suddenly the defence of the Baltic states looks shaky as the political will to oppose Russuan invasion falters.

NATO Article Five has been declared just once since 1949, the day after 9/11. It would be difficult to get an A5 declaration against Russia. Hungary would have to sign, and they are sympathetic to Moscow.

 

[Robert]

Sorry Robert but this is a very poor post from you. No condemnation but comes across as a defence of these idiot soldiers. The far right in the UK and Europe is growing and I can understand why if intelligent people such as yourself have fallen for this nonsense regarding Corbyn.

I advise you and everyone to watch this by Owen Jones.

Corbyn is the reason I quit supporting the Labour Party in 2016 after the PLP coup failed.

A section of squaddies shooting up a cutout is not an expression of the far right, it’s just a bad taste joke, an indicator of Corbyn’s utter lack of credibility within HM Armed Forces. I spoke to an ex-RN workmate about it. His response was a shrug.

I expect that the section’s Sergeant will lose his stripes for allowing this puerile behaviour and that will be all.

I don’t give Jones a moment of credence because he doesn’t give it to me. He blocked me on Twitter, as well as everyone else expressing opinions counter to his narrative.

 

[Technics 1210]

Labour win a byelection this week in Newport!

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...ervatives-ukip-general-election-a8856466.html

Corbyn has massive support, and May will ensure he is the next PM!

 

[the Great Khan]

But if Britain pulls out, USA might do the same. Then suddenly the defence of the Baltic states looks shaky as the political will to oppose Russuan invasion falters.

NATO Article Five has been declared just once since 1949, the day after 9/11. It would be difficult to get an A5 declaration against Russia. Hungary would have to sign, and they are sympathetic to Moscow.

not happening..its just a scare story fed to you guys..trust me its a myth..

 

[Technics 1210]

But if Britain pulls out, USA might do the same. Then suddenly the defence of the Baltic states looks shaky as the political will to oppose Russuan invasion falters.

NATO Article Five has been declared just once since 1949, the day after 9/11. It would be difficult to get an A5 declaration against Russia. Hungary would have to sign, and they are sympathetic to Moscow.

Do you blame Russia? I mean USA didn't take missiles in Cuba kindly, and Russia is basically saying the same, NATO missiles are too close to the Russian borders.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The enemies always want patriots to become soft and pacifists, so that they can continue with their merry ways. UK and every country needs people to toughen up and not be pansies because a sheet of printed paper was used for some shooting practice.

Why is Russia considered Britain's enemy? They are half a world away and must have plenty of enemies on their own borders. I have said the same about Pakistanis who seem more concerned about Palestine than what goes on in their own continent so the same applies here. Unless Britain is planning on reviving empire, I don't see what we gain by getting involved in other people's wars.

Personally I could care less if soldiers want to use Corbyn's picture as target practice, so agree with you there.

 

[barah_admi]

The bigger issue is that the army is supposed to represent not just a certain physicality but also a moral standard. That fails when you mock shoot a politician in an environment where one has already been assassinated and several other plots averted.

Entirely irresponsible.

 

[Robert]

The bigger issue is that the army is supposed to represent not just a certain physicality but also a moral standard. That fails when you mock shoot a politician in an environment where one has already been assassinated and several other plots averted.

Entirely irresponsible.

A sensible post.

 

[Robert]

Why is Russia considered Britain's enemy?

Because they have ICBMs and SLBMs trained on our cities right now.

Because they have been probing our airspace for the last decade, testing our reaction time.

Because they are our geopolitical rivals and spoilers.

Because they have attacked Russian dissidents with polonium and Novichok on our streets.

 

[Robert]

Do you blame Russia?

Yes. The Baltic states were under their yoke for decades and want freedom and democracy, so joined NATO for their own protection.

 

[Robert]

Labour win a byelection this week in Newport!

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...ervatives-ukip-general-election-a8856466.html

Corbyn has massive support, and May will ensure he is the next PM!

Labour was down 13% from 2017, losing votes to many different candidates. Tory votes down 8%, mainly transferred to a resurgent UKIP. Dunno what this means in anything. Very low poll. I think a lot of people are just sick of politics.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Because they have ICBMs and SLBMs trained on our cities right now.

Because they have been probing our airspace for the last decade, testing our reaction time.

Because they are our geopolitical rivals and spoilers.

Because they have attacked Russian dissidents with polonium and Novichok on our streets.

Isn't all of that because we are part of NATO which has been at war with Russia for decades? NATO itself which is generally set up to serve US interests as far as I can see. Otherwise what benefit does Russia get from making an enemy of Britain? Do they have designs on a relatively small island half a world away?

Genuinely curious since I can't see why they would.

 

[James]

Gutted with your posts in this thread Robert, haven’t seen you once condemn these cringeworthy and dishonourable actions of our normally exemplary British soldiers.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Gutted with your posts in this thread Robert, haven’t seen you once condemn these cringeworthy and dishonourable actions of our normally exemplary British soldiers.

Shooting a piece of paper is more honourable than shooting iraqis and afghans which the "normally exemplary" British soldiers have done.

 

[Robert]

Gutted with your posts in this thread Robert, haven’t seen you once condemn these cringeworthy and dishonourable actions of our normally exemplary British soldiers.

I described it as puerile. In my opinion someone will lose their stripes, and a few others will be peeling spuds for a month.

Now, the alleged rape of the teenage girl by the six soldiers - that I condemn utterly, if true. They must face courts martial and if found guilty be dishonourably discharged and serve custodial sentences.

 

[Robert]

Isn't all of that because we are part of NATO which has been at war with Russia for decades? NATO itself which is generally set up to serve US interests as far as I can see. Otherwise what benefit does Russia get from making an enemy of Britain? Do they have designs on a relatively small island half a world away?

Genuinely curious since I can't see why they would.

The Western Alliance of France, UK and Benelux was set up by in the years after WW2 to defend against a possible invasion of Western Europe by USSR. This was expanded into NATO when Canada, USA, Iceland and others joined later.

USSR responded by forming the Warsaw Pact.

When USSR collapsed in 1989, NATO continued and expanded. This didn’t seem an issue for Yeltsin but Putin disapproves. He is rebuilding Russia’s military at a rate of 5% of GDP - compared to 2% by UK and 1.5% by Germany. He is nibbling off bits of other nations and conducting asymmetric warfare in the form of fake news, cyber-attacks, corrosion of institutions with oligarch money and destabilisation through propaganda.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The Western Alliance of France, UK and Benelux was set up by in the years after WW2 to defend against a possible invasion of Western Europe by USSR. This was expanded into NATO when Canada, USA, Iceland and others joined later.

USSR responded by forming the Warsaw Pact.

When USSR collapsed in 1989, NATO continued and expanded. This didn’t seem an issue for Yeltsin but Putin disapproves. He is rebuilding Russia’s military at a rate of 5% of GDP - compared to 2% by UK and 1.5% by Germany. He is nibbling off bits of other nations and conducting asymmetric warfare in the form of fake news, cyber-attacks, corrosion of institutions with oligarch money and destabilisation through propaganda.

Well it didn't really answer my question as to why Russia would be bothered about our little island in this day and age, but I suppose if you take world war history and British empire's proud role, then we shouldn't relinquish it so readily. Russia might be weak and pathetic today, but tomorrow they might present a threat based on potential objection to our ambitions

 

[Robert]

Well it didn't really answer my question as to why Russia would be bothered about our little island in this day and age, but I suppose if you take world war history and British empire's proud role, then we shouldn't relinquish it so readily. Russia might be weak and pathetic today, but tomorrow they might present a threat based on potential objection to our ambitions

Our little island is on the Security Council, has nukes and the world’s best intelligence services.

They want us to leave the EU because that weakens the EU. They want Corbyn to be PM because that weakens NATO. Both these objectives give them more scope to manoeuvre in the pursuit of their objectives.

 

[msaaim89]

The Western Alliance of France, UK and Benelux was set up by in the years after WW2 to defend against a possible invasion of Western Europe by USSR. This was expanded into NATO when Canada, USA, Iceland and others joined later.

USSR responded by forming the Warsaw Pact.

When USSR collapsed in 1989, NATO continued and expanded. This didn’t seem an issue for Yeltsin but Putin disapproves. He is rebuilding Russia’s military at a rate of 5% of GDP - compared to 2% by UK and 1.5% by Germany. He is nibbling off bits of other nations and conducting asymmetric warfare in the form of fake news, cyber-attacks, corrosion of institutions with oligarch money and destabilisation through propaganda.

How does that 5% compare to the US?

 

[Robert]

How does that 5% compare to the US?

USA spends about 4% of GDP in defence.

Of course their economy is ten times bigger than Russia’s.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Our little island is on the Security Council, has nukes and the world’s best intelligence services.

They want us to leave the EU because that weakens the EU. They want Corbyn to be PM because that weakens NATO. Both these objectives give them more scope to manoeuvre in the pursuit of their objectives.

But that's us affecting their region rather than them affecting ours. I don't really see why they would be interested in British territory itself, but would they want to limit our global impact on their region? I think so. I don't think they've got much to threaten us, certainly not from an ideological POV.

 

[Robert]

But that's us affecting their region rather than them affecting ours. I don't really see why they would be interested in British territory itself, but would they want to limit our global impact on their region? I think so. I don't think they've got much to threaten us, certainly not from an ideological POV.

They have the ability to kill everyone in the UK with nuclear missiles.

From an ideological point of view there is a growing number of Britons who would do away with democracy and press freedom, and replace it with a Putin-style strongman.

You seem to be advocating withdrawal from NATO and ending our influence in Europe. OK, but we have been a pillar of the rules-based order which kept the peace in Europe since 1945. Take that pillar out and European peace is less secure.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

They have the ability to kill everyone in the UK with nuclear missiles.

From an ideological point of view there is a growing number of Britons who would do away with democracy and press freedom, and replace it with a Putin-style strongman.

You seem to be advocating withdrawal from NATO and ending our influence in Europe. OK, but we have been a pillar of the rules-based order which kept the peace in Europe since 1945. Take that pillar out and European peace is less secure.

I am not advocating anything, just pointing out that if we see Russia as a threat, they probably see NATO at least as much of a threat. Maybe it is the distance which makes the Russian threat seem unlikely to me, also I always think of Russia as mostly poverty stricken thanks to decades of communist rule. The threat from those type of countries always seems overblown to me. Why are they a threat to us and not long-standing Russian allies India for example?

 

[msaaim89]

USA spends about 4% of GDP in defence.

Of course their economy is ten times bigger than Russia’s.

Well there you go. Russia’s spend is justified.

 

[msaaim89]

I am not advocating anything, just pointing out that if we see Russia as a threat, they probably see NATO at least as much of a threat. Maybe it is the distance which makes the Russian threat seem unlikely to me, also I always think of Russia as mostly poverty stricken thanks to decades of communist rule. The threat from those type of countries always seems overblown to me. Why are they a threat to us and not long-standing Russian allies India for example?

Robert is seeing a boogeyman that doesn't exist.

 

[Robert]

Robert is seeing a boogeyman that doesn't exist.

Oh, so there are no Russian nuclear missiles trained on London and Birmingham right now? So no Russian aircraft are probing our airspace?

 

[Technics 1210]

NATO At 70 Years Old... Time For The Zombie To Die

First, it gives the US an excuse to justify its enormous military presence in Europe. Instead of appearing as an occupying force, which it is, the Americans claim to be a protector of allies against malign Russia, or formerly the Soviet Union. This allows Washington to exert political control over its so-called European allies, and specifically to prevent any normalized relations with Russia. US vice president Mike Pence this week scolded Germany and fellow NATO member Turkey for daring to continue relations with Moscow, in the form of the Nord Stream 2 gas project and Ankara’s purchase of Russian S-400 air defense system. Pence inferred treasonous conduct on the part of Berlin and Ankara just because these two nominally independent countries have chosen to do business with Russia. Pence was thus demonstrating the classic NATO purpose of dividing Europe from Moscow.

A second function of NATO is to serve as an extension of the US military-industrial complex and, in turn, an important buttress for American corporate capitalism, which is totally dependent on military spending. When President Donald Trump castigates European allies, like Germany, for not spending enough on military and NATO, his real concern is for European nations to buy more American weaponry, such as the vastly over-priced and over-rated F-35 fighter jet. If NATO were to be disbanded – as it should from its obsolete objective purpose – then US capitalism would suffer a major withdrawal of European subsidy in the form of decreased weapons purchases.

The irony here is that Trump has previously denigrated NATO as obsolete. In his irascibility, he is more correct than he seems to realize. But Trump has – despite superficial griping – still continued to boost NATO for the purpose of hiking European military spending. What Trump means by “obsolete” is that the past financial tribute from the Europeans to the US militarized economy must henceforth be significantly increased. The outrageous demands by Trump are inciting tensions within NATO. At a time of massive civilian social needs across Europe being neglected due to “fiscal constraints”, the American ultimatums for more military spending are bound to be seen by the wider European populace as an intolerable dictate.

A third function of NATO for its American leadership is that it gives a pseudo legal cover of “multinationalism” to what would otherwise be seen as blatant US imperialist aggression all over the globe.

NATO forces have assisted US illegal wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, among other interventions. This by an organization that self-declares itself a bastion of security and peace.

It was 20 years ago that US-led forces under the cover of NATO bombed Serbia and its capital Belgrade. That marked a watershed assault on international law, and the unleashing of US global violence with impunity.

Washington could not carry out its aggression without the political and legal cover of NATO. Jens Stoltenberg, the present NATO secretary general, was in Washington this week calling for more aggression towards Russia. The Norwegian figurehead is a shameless warmonger who is violating the UN Charter for the sake of feathering his career as an American puppet.

Key Excerpt :

NATO’s first secretary general, Britain’s Lord Ismay, was candid in the mission of the military alliance. Its objective, he said, was to, “Keep Russia out, the Americans in, and Germany down”.

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arc...ril/04/nato-at-70-time-for-the-zombie-to-die/

There is an argument here, Russia were indeed provoked!

 

[msaaim89]

Oh, so there are no Russian nuclear missiles trained on London and Birmingham right now? So no Russian aircraft are probing our airspace?

That's the whole point? MAD, so there will be no war.

They may be probing but are they entering our airspace? It's no different to what NATO is doing.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Corbyn is the reason I quit supporting the Labour Party in 2016 after the PLP coup failed.

A section of squaddies shooting up a cutout is not an expression of the far right, it’s just a bad taste joke, an indicator of Corbyn’s utter lack of credibility within HM Armed Forces. I spoke to an ex-RN workmate about it. His response was a shrug.

I expect that the section’s Sergeant will lose his stripes for allowing this puerile behaviour and that will be all.

I don’t give Jones a moment of credence because he doesn’t give it to me. He blocked me on Twitter, as well as everyone else expressing opinions counter to his narrative.

It would be more than a bad joke if the soldiers were shooting up the PM of the Jewish state.

If you dont like Jones fine but he makes some very valid points in his short video. Corbyn has been attacked a couple of times now, Jo Cox was murdered. Both incidents are the cause of the right wing media making them as enemies only because they stand up for minorities and call out crimes of the government and their allies.

Your points on Russia are absurd to put it kindly. It's like something from the 60's ,wathcing Sean Connery Bond films.

Russia is not a threat to the world. Was it Russia who invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya or is Russia bombing Sudan, Somalia and other parts of the world? You need to accept the British government and it's allies have been involved in mass state terrorism and should be on trial for war crimes which have killed millions of people. I dont blame Russia for be wary of such war hungry nations which are mostly Nato senior members. And it's nothing to do with the UK what Russia does to other nations on her border, we are not the world police but at this moment the criminals of the world.

 

[Realromeo]

Vast majority of the soldiers are right wing, no matter where they live. Why is everyone surprised ?

 

[Robert]

It would be more than a bad joke if the soldiers were shooting up the PM of the Jewish state.

If you dont like Jones fine but he makes some very valid points in his short video. Corbyn has been attacked a couple of times now, Jo Cox was murdered. Both incidents are the cause of the right wing media making them as enemies only because they stand up for minorities and call out crimes of the government and their allies.

Your points on Russia are absurd to put it kindly. It's like something from the 60's ,wathcing Sean Connery Bond films.

Russia is not a threat to the world. Was it Russia who invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya or is Russia bombing Sudan, Somalia and other parts of the world? You need to accept the British government and it's allies have been involved in mass state terrorism and should be on trial for war crimes which have killed millions of people. I dont blame Russia for be wary of such war hungry nations which are mostly Nato senior members. And it's nothing to do with the UK what Russia does to other nations on her border, we are not the world police but at this moment the criminals of the world.

But they didn’t shoot up a cutout of the PM of Israel, so kindly stop raising straw men.

Corbyn will have been detailed a plain-clothes Army bodyguard in his role as Leader of HM Opposition and perhaps chooses to eschew this protection. Nobody in “the right wing press” made Jo Cox out as an enemy. Her murderer was a deranged man influenced by fascist propaganda, much of which is from beyond these shores and no little of which originates in the troll houses of St Petersburg.

As for absurdity, you have resorted to ridicule because you have no arguments left.

Russia did invade and occupy Afghanistan for a decade if you remember; more recently invaded South Ossetia, Georgia and the Crimea, and has contributed heavily to the atrocious death toll in Syria. If you don’t blame Russia for these horrors then your moral compass has failed. UK has blood on its hands too but right now is helping deter Russian invasion of the Baltic states.

 

[Robert]

That's the whole point? MAD, so there will be no war.

They may be probing but are they entering our airspace? It's no different to what NATO is doing.

Perhaps you don’t recall the years of good relations between the West and Russia which followed the fall of the Soviet Union. About ten years ago the relation deteriorated as they started probing our air defences again. They got one aircraft far up the Bristol Channel before it was intercepted. It’s about testing our systems, seeing how far they can get before a Typhoon comes alongside and they wave to each other and the Russian withdraws from our airspace.

As for NATO they use satellites for spying, not planes.

There was an incident last year where a RN destroyer in international waters was buzzed by fifteen Sukhois to see how it would react.

 

[KingKhanWC]

But they didn’t shoot up a cutout of the PM of Israel, so kindly stop raising straw men.

Corbyn will have been detailed a plain-clothes Army bodyguard in his role as Leader of HM Opposition and perhaps chooses to eschew this protection. Nobody in “the right wing press” made Jo Cox out as an enemy. Her murderer was a deranged man influenced by fascist propaganda, much of which is from beyond these shores and no little of which originates in the troll houses of St Petersburg.

As for absurdity, you have resorted to ridicule because you have no arguments left.

Russia did invade and occupy Afghanistan for a decade if you remember; more recently invaded South Ossetia, Georgia and the Crimea, and has contributed heavily to the atrocious death toll in Syria. If you don’t blame Russia for these horrors then your moral compass has failed. UK has blood on its hands too but right now is helping deter Russian invasion of the Baltic states.

It's not a strawman, it's pointing to double standards where the UK media/government have more care for others always pointing out and crying about antisemitism.

I never said the right wing media specifically made Jo to be an enemy but their general narrative of those who support immigrants or call out poor foriegn policy. Right wing terrorists pick up on this.

It is absurd because it wasnt Russia who invaded Afghanistan but the communist Soviet Union. Crimea is part of Russia and even so Keiv but Ukraine is now a nation. Again it's not the business of the UK who has blood on it's hands to preach to others or to protect Baltic nations. We dont pay out taxes for this nonsense.