pacifists/conscienti ous objectors/Jeremy Corbyn

Bother! I checked the spelling of conscientious but didnt notice the gap! Apologies!

Luckily at the minute the question is academic. But Heaven help us if Labour ever get into power with Corbyn as leader and ISIL still a danger.

My thoughts exactly Lapwing. but they would hold a series of debates.So that's a comfort!
Soontb I don't think pacifists would offer any violence at all no matter what the provocation ( in theory) but con. Objectors would, but they would cherry pick their fights.

And mine too Lapwing and roses.

There is no way on this earth I would want JC as the leader of this country. Imagine IS clapping their hands in glee as they make their move unchallenged.

I think this was answered for you in some detail on another thread soon.

The other viewpoint isn't doing too well at freeing the world from violence. At the rate things are going every country will be at war with each other very soon.

I abhor violence and war but if someone gunned down my child I would want them despatched into the next world asap that is if I couldn't physically rip their * heads of myself. I'm a Member if the Labour Party- just saying.

Corbyn did a great job of dissembling and prevaricating when interviewed by Laura Kuenssberg on the news last night.

I'm quite sure Jeremy Corbyn will never be elected prime minister because of his views. The greater majority do not agree with him.

We need strong leadership now.

I agree that I would definitely not want Corbyn in any sort of position to lead on this but I do think that he has been misquoted or quoted out of context. I think he's well meaning but seems to have accidentally emerged into a higher profile job than he ever imagined.

Pacifism has a long and honourable history rooted in Christian values. I am neither a pacifist nor a Christian, but would defend anybody's right to be either.

JC is a total twerp, he's not even a pacifist just prevaricating and ducking and diving.
Heaven forbid he should ever be PM.

He would probably have all the opposing sides in for a chat and tell them to play nicely. The man is a disgrace.

The trouble is, he has got so many supporters within the Labour Party outside of the Shadow Cabinet. (who mostly seem to realise he is a fool) Heaven forbid he ever becomes PM.

I too would defend the right to be a pacifist, whitewave. That doesn't mean that a pacifist is fit to lead a country in a world containing Putin and ISIS.

Personally I think his main supporters are the vast amount of public sector workers (and ex PS ) who see him as their meal ticket great savior.

Could be wrong but my sister who has never taken an interest in politics whatsoever has suddenly began talking about him as though he is going to personally save the NHS and give them all "the pay rises they deserve" . This has undoubtedly come from her union. No surprises there.

Sorry for going off topic about JC.

grumppa you read too much into my post I haven't voiced an opinion as to whether being a pacifist makes you suitable to be a PM.

Thinking about JC - in his own words " I have a very low threshold to any form of violence" he then goes on to talk about the fight against the Nazis in the Ww2 and how he would have joined that if he had been alive then. So I would interpret that as "No I am not a pacifist, and would use violence of absolutely necessary" I think that he needs convincing at a very high level and there is nothing gung-ho about his approach.

I'm a supporter of JC. How can you say what he would and wouldn't do at some point in the future? The current method of indiscriminate, otherwise known as targeted. bombing has been used many times in recent decades and hasn't been affective. Surely the time has come to think of different ways.

Perhaps a start would be to stop the blanket media coverage of every atrocity. I'm not saying pretend nothing has happened. We need straightforward news reporting but all the coulds, woulds and maybes that come in subsequent reports and programmes don't help anyone. We need to strangle the massive about of publicity the terrorists get. Fear is an important weapon. The amount of coverage helps to create fear which hands power to the terrorist.

Yes VQ There is a fine line between reporting what is happening in the world and giving the terrorist the world stage on which to advertise their expertise.

JC seems to be quite acedemic in his thinking. Rather than practical. He isnt going to actually do much, is he?

Pacifists probably kill as many people as non-pacifists. I do not think the choice is ever to kill or not to kill. It is fight and this group of people get killed. Do not fight and that group of people get killed. It is merely a choice between which group gets killed. I think more pacifists should realise this.

Actually ISIS depends on the radicalisation of young and impressionable Muslims to build up its fighting force. And what better way to radicalise them than to drop bombs on their families, homes and cities.

As someone mentioned on another thread, Ireland is a great demonstration of the pointlessness of these tit-for-tat atrocities which only serve to create further hatred and an unquenchable appetite for violent revenge. At the risk of being boring, I say again that we need to establish who is supplying ISIS with training, weapons and ongoing logistical support, and take measures to totally isolate them from the rest of the world.

I recall some posters taking exception to George Osborne being referred to as "Gideon" on some threads. And yet it seems it is perfectly OK to refer to Jeremy Corbyn as "a twerp", "a disgrace" and "a fool". Everyone is entitled to their opinion but that is just personal abuse.

gillybob Please don't let the axe you have to grind regarding your sister colour your view of all public service workers, many of whom do a very stressful job in difficult circumstances and for pay that is not commensurate with the degree of responsibility they have.