Cyprus-Forum.com

[Robin Hood]

Meanwhile, I am glad to see that the Liberal Democrats do, indeed, seem to be making a play for the votes of the abused and forgotten 48% who voted 'remain' and have placed a second referendum in their manifesto. This means that if the party performs well and ends up in a coalition government, it will quite legitimately be able to push for the holding of a second referendum for which it will have received a mandate from those who voted for it.

The UK had its referendum .......... the result is known ...........Brexit ......... time to move on with a united country behind a leader that can get it sorted.

I think Corbyn will be a better negotiator that May. Is he a Leader? He is improving no doubt, and is beginning to get people to listen .......... but a Leader, I'm not so sure ..... but I don't think so!

[tsukoui]

Corbyn is not healthy, haven't you seen how he takes a deep breath whilst being asked questions by the media, Faragge was much better at dealing with the media, and he was better than Galloway in that he knew how to run the country without actually holding a position. Galloway is quite good on Talk Radio, but he missed the point, he became a journalist whilst still an MP and so was essentially taking on two jobs rather than being the great leader he aspired to be.

[tsukoui]

To return to the flow, the opinion polls are reporting that 15% support Corbyn with 36% undecided, either the British people are playing the pollsters for fools, or Corbyn's mandate just increased

[Robin Hood]

TD/STUD:
Do you really, honestly believe that Russia has the capability to determine or even remotely influence the UK election?

The press you seem to be listening to say that RT and Sputnik are leading the disinformation (propaganda) campaign. If you see this as a proven scenario, then do you really, honestly believe that the US, the Worlds Superpower, and the UK their ‘poodle’, are not even more capable of affecting a counter propaganda influence on the UK electorate? I find it incredible that sensible people believe this without questioning the authenticity of the claims! The same question arises every time .......... where is the evidence, and it is NEVER presented?

TD (Although this is not really relevant to the OP ........... which was about Mays about turn, which I personally have no problem with, except maybe the motives!)

You make the wild claim:

They (‘little Englanders' .... what ever that defines) may perhaps realise that one of the motives Putin has for trying to destroy the EU, apart from a more general wish to wreak as much destruction in the West as possible, is that he has his eyes on reconquering the territory in Europe that the Soviet Union once occupied and enslaving the people there again. They may also realise that if he succeeds in doing this, there is no reason for him to stop there and not try to gradually take the whole continent. Having become alive to the threat posed by a Russia under a dictator with expansionist ambitions, the Little Englanders may start thinking that it would be a good idea for Europeans, people who have a very similar culture, way of life and values, rather than squabbling and fighting among themselves as they did for many centuries, to unite in common purpose and thus be stronger and more able to withstand external threats.

(Isn't that what NATO has supposed to have done? Or am I missing something? The same NATO that is massing weapons and forces on the Russian border? ..... which most people would see as a threat. Is it any wonder that Russia in turn puts more forces inside their own territory along their borders, to counter that threat? Or are the rules different?)

What specific and/or credible, factual evidence can you present that supports ANY of the comments I have high-lighted?

[Robin Hood]

Corbyn is not healthy, haven't you seen how he takes a deep breath whilst being asked questions by the media, (He is getting on a bit or is he just controlling his breathing?)

Faragge was much better at dealing with the media, and he was better than Galloway in that he knew how to run the country without actually holding a position. Galloway is quite good on Talk Radio, but he missed the point, he became a journalist whilst still an MP and so was essentially taking on two jobs rather than being the great leader he aspired to be.

Galloway, although I don't go for his slow measured approach although the message is sometimes credible, and Faragge .... who is exactly the opposite, are both leaders as were Blair, Thatcher and Churchill. Most of the other UK leaders are almost non-people and lack any real charisma.

I like some of Corbyn's policies and, contrary to TD's claim, I have always held the same views on The State rather than Commercial Banks, creating the countries currency.

[Robin Hood]

To return to the flow, the opinion polls are reporting that 15% support Corbyn with 36% undecided, either the British people are playing the pollsters for fools, or Corbyn's mandate just increased

I don't think any of them have clue which way this will go. (Maybe we would be better off asking Putin ..... he apparently is controlling the whole show ..... according to some sources? )

[supporttheunderdog]

To return to the flow, the opinion polls are reporting that 15% support Corbyn with 36% undecided, either the British people are playing the pollsters for fools, or Corbyn's mandate just increased

I don't think any of them have clue which way this will go. (Maybe we would be better off asking Putin ..... he apparently is controlling the whole show ..... according to some sources? )

If he is not, he would probably like to...
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/putin-russia-donald-trump-cia-investigation-fbi-hacking-jeremy-corbyn-brexit-prime-minister-no-10-a7472381.html

Putin's Putanas are certainly evident in the comments columns of the UK MSM, but the presence of NATO troops on the Russian Border is in response to perceived threats (real or imaginary) of a resurgent Russia, with its perceived encouragement (real or imaginary) of irredentist movements in EG Ukraine and desire to rebuild the former Soviet and before that Tsarist empire,

So who is threatening whom? The number of non national NATO troops is apparently about 7200 in SIX countries. That is against 771,000 thought to be active in the Russian Armed forces: Is the bear so frightened of being invaded by so few.

[Tim Drayton]

Do you really, honestly believe that Russia has the capability to determine or even remotely influence the UK election?

This is one way that they are trying to influence the French Presidential election:

Russian hackers 'target' presidential candidate Macron
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39705062

[Robin Hood]

Do you really, honestly believe that Russia has the capability to determine or even remotely influence the UK election?

This is one way that they are trying to influence the French Presidential election:

Russian hackers 'target' presidential candidate Macron
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39705062

You obviously do believe it is always the Russians ..........

• The attackers are believed to be part of the same group that targeted the US election

• Mr Hacquebord said telltale techniques of the group lent weight to the idea that the people involved in the French attacks were behind ones seen last year in the US.

• However, a spokesman for the agency said it was difficult to be sure that the Pawn Storm group was behind the attacks.

• The Pawn Storm group is also believed to have been involved in other attacks on political organisations, including the Christian Democratic Union of Germany, the Turkish government and Montenegro's parliament, as well as the World Anti-Doping Agency and Arabic television channel al-Jazeera.

Hardly what you would call evidence is it? Although I doubt there are any of us that would actually understand any proof positive evidence if it was explained in any detail ......... but come on, it is a hunch! Belief, no matter how strong is not proof.

The Russians are supposedly very good on computer software, so it is a probability they could be responsible and no more than that. Was it not being suggested a few days ago that the US security services had the capability to mask their identities and make their own hacking look like it was Russia or China that was behind these attacks? No proof, but just as plausible.

[Robin Hood]

STUD:

So who is threatening whom? The number of non national NATO troops is apparently about 7200 in SIX countries. That is against 771,000 thought to be active in the Russian Armed forces: Is the bear so frightened of being invaded by so few.

They are not there to fight ..... they will be ‘advisors’! But I doubt the threat to be the ‘boots-on-the-ground’ more what the ‘advisors’ are there to control and operate. I does not help when clowns like Fallon threaten that they would use a nuclear first strike option if they were threatened ...... but he did not say where the threat would likely come from.

The big problem is that with NATO being so close to their border, Russia would not have time to make the phone call to check if an incident they detect is real or an accident. That means a ‘hair trigger’ response and we know that Russia has a fairly good defence shield so they would take out ALL the closest targets first.

I doubt it would happen ..... but if it did, one minute the arc between the Baltic and the Black Sea would be quiet and peaceful ........... minutes later it would be destroyed ...... and what would happen then is just too frightening to imagine.

Again, when you consider Corbyn’s defence proposals in broad terms it has a lot of common sense behind the thinking.