From Todays Grauniad

**Cuddles** · 08-09-2010, 12:38

Originally Posted by doc80905

Jenkins, not that long ago, advocated abolishing the armed forces altogether and spend the money on more social workers and the likes. Taking aside all the other, ahem, problems this could throw up in the future, I wonder how he'd feel about the prospect of a few hundred thousand people losing their jobs overnight.

That's the problem with these types of idealistic lefties unfortunately, they don't ever think about the consequences of the sh!te they spout.

If you were to pick him up on this, the caring and sharing tosser would probably snidely remark that most of the unemployed military would end up in the nick anyway, apart fom those who die of drink, drugs or life-style diseases. It is one rule for indian-print skirt wearing, three buttocked, fat bosomed social workers, I'm afraid and a completely different and altogether more duplicitous set entirely for us.

**mark1234** · 08-09-2010, 13:43

It reads like a smug idealistic 15 year old who just discovered Marx wrote into his local paper for a competition or something, not something written by a knighted veteran reporter, is it worth giving it the time of day, even Guardian readers aren't stupid enough not to know a wind up when they see it.

**Semper_Flexibilis** · 08-09-2010, 14:00

Originally Posted by IndianaDel

Perhaps because this is the correct address
Latest news, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

No "" see.

Load of cobblers all of it though

Link still doesn't work. Clearly my Mac has been corrupted by the nasty Tory right.

**Ashie..** · 08-09-2010, 15:26

Do we really need anything more than what is sufficient for foreign peace keeping duties now we have tied the knot with our European partners.

**chocolate_frog** · 08-09-2010, 15:52

Originally Posted by Ashie..

Do we really need anything more than what is sufficient for foreign peace keeping duties now we have tied the knot with our European partners.

Depends... will they have the capability to deter attacks or threats to our interests around the globe?

**Biscuits_Brown** · 08-09-2010, 16:30

For some reason "You sir, are a cock." is considered inappropriate.

**doc80905** · 08-09-2010, 16:53

Originally Posted by Ashie..

Do we really need anything more than what is sufficient for foreign peace keeping duties now we have tied the knot with our European partners.

Nothing ever likely to kick off in the future anywhere that we might have to respond to then? Or perhaps we could ask any future aggressors to the UK to give us 20 years notice so we can build up our military again.

Funny thing actually, throughout history there are numerous times when people questioned "why are we paying for these men/this equipment/these ships etc".....and then something invariably pops up to remind them why.

**Micawber** · 08-09-2010, 17:04

My my, there are a lot of people on here who can dish it out - chortling at Clarkson et al - but as soon as the other side chime in then fuck me, it's left wing scum and something must be DONE!

I'm a Guardian reader - by default really because the others are such untrustworthy rubbish - and went through this with a disbelieving shake of the head.

But he did make a nice, if simplistic, point about the 'who should pay for Trident' row currently going on.

If you - the MOD - try and dodge the bill by claiming our nuclear power status is really all about politics and diplomacy, then you can't claim that it is damaging to our defence if it gets binned.

**Mr_Fingerz** · 08-09-2010, 17:13

But if Trident is punted into the long grass, the £Bns that would have been spent on it won't be recycled into the Defence Budget. If anything, they'll be appropriated by HMT and MOD will still have to find the 25%-40% savings that all Depts have to find.

BTW I'm no fan of the Instant Bucket of Sunshine, but if we are to retain it then someone very high up the food chain will have to justify it, and then explain to the boots on the ground why we don't have the helicopters that we need.

**DeltaDog** · 08-09-2010, 17:41

Originally Posted by Micawber

My my, there are a lot of people on here who can dish it out - chortling at Clarkson et al - but as soon as the other side chime in then fuck me, it's left wing scum and something must be DONE!
.

Sneering, righteous, lefty cunt.

**Cuddles** · 08-09-2010, 17:52

Originally Posted by Micawber

If you - the MOD - try and dodge the bill by claiming our nuclear power status is really all about politics and diplomacy, then you can't claim that it is damaging to our defence if it gets binned.

It is arguments like that which prove that Prof Hawking is wrong and there is still need for decent philosophical study and training in this world!

**Le_addeur_noir** · 08-09-2010, 17:56

Originally Posted by harareboy99

I hate Guardian Readers.

The Guardian.the essential accessory for every anti-British crank under the sun.

**Le_addeur_noir** · 08-09-2010, 17:58

Originally Posted by Ancient_Mariner

Don't worry. The Guardian is losing nearly £200 million a year. It's thought that the loss of the government job ads, as Dave migrates them to a web site, will be the last straw. I suspect that Mr Jenkins is merely pitching for a job on the Mirror when his P45 arrives.

The Daily Mirror,the essential down-market accessory for every anti-British traitor under the sun.