d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Keir Starmer "leader" Of England
Prev134567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 54,225
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
May 16 2026 10:45am
Just to add to this, as an example of the issues faced by the NHS, during the conservative rule they adopted a political scheme whereby many non-EU nurses working in the NHS on Tier 2 visas would have had to leave the UK after six years unless they earned at least £35,000 a year - a salary most nurses did not reach at the time. Critics described this as “kicking out” or “deporting” foreign nurses. its not a far stretch to say the conservative government was racist, or if not racist, carried out multiple shenanigans that a critic could argue, was racist.

stuff like this just made the NHS worse again.


To be fair, a salary of 35k pounds per year is a bar that a nurse should clear after 6+ years of working in the UK. But yes, the Tories were completely useless. What exactly do they have to show for after 14 years in power? Both them and Labour deserve their electoral demise.
Member
Posts: 56,497
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 564,336.57
May 16 2026 10:53am
To be fair, a salary of 35k pounds per year is a bar that a nurse should clear after 6+ years of working in the UK. But yes, the Tories were completely useless. What exactly do they have to show for after 14 years in power? Both them and Labour deserve their electoral demise.


I would not blame the individual if the employer is not paying them more then 35,000 a year. so when you say the highlighted section, i presume you mean, the fact that many of these nurses did not reach this threshold is a stain on the NHS and the government, underpaying nurses that provide a critical service (you know, saving peoples lives) and then having the audacity to expel said nurses from the country after not paying them proper wages.

we can agree that Labour and the Conservatives deserve their electoral demise. Labour for what they did to Corbyn, and the Conservatives for Brexit. I am not saying Corbyn was a saint, I am saying this New Labour got rid of Corbyn, and all of his grass roots followers, and replaced them with what we see in front of us, a bunch of people with no ability, no morals and nothing to give to the people of England.

This post was edited by ferdia on May 16 2026 10:54am
Member
Posts: 16,051
Joined: Jun 27 2010
Gold: 102,354.50
May 21 2026 12:38am
Two tier Keir

Member
Posts: 56,497
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 564,336.57
May 21 2026 01:25am


He is duplicitous
He has no morals
He is a liar and a back stabber
His foreign policy is to aid ethnic cleansing and genocide
He has no moral fiber
He has done nothing for normal people
He is without ability

This post was edited by ferdia on May 21 2026 01:26am
Member
Posts: 56,497
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 564,336.57
May 26 2026 10:26am


pretty much sums it up. moral failure.
Member
Posts: 56,497
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 564,336.57
Jun 6 2026 04:14pm
The recurring issue ~

Prominent MP tells Dublin event UK Labour Party faces ‘chaos’ if Andy Burnham fails to win byelection - John McDonnell says Keir Starmer has lost public confidence and no other candidate has the support to replace him
Member
Posts: 56,497
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 564,336.57
Jun 12 2026 05:16am
Armed forces minister Al Carns and Defence Secretary John Healey have both quit with a scathing attack on Sir Keir's military funding plans. more sailors leaving the sinking ship.
Member
Posts: 18,134
Joined: Dec 3 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jun 12 2026 11:02am
This is another of my fire and forget predictions -

The TLDR here is that I predict Keir Stamer will be ousted as leader of england within the next 12 months.

Long Version ~ On 4 July 2024, Labour won a landslide, taking 411 of 650 seats and a 174‑seat majority. The Conservatives were reduced to 121 seats, effectively wiped out. Labour could do whatever it wanted. Or could it? The party’s leader was Keir Starmer. He became leader after Jeremy Corbyn failed to withstand a concerted campaign by party insiders opposed to his views on Israel. Once in power, and weeks after calling Corbyn his "friend" Starmer denied any friendship with Corbyn. He has no allies, only interests. Corbyn’s name was useful when it helped, disposable when it didn’t — transactional, not loyal. Starmer’s transactional worldview extends to his career. A human rights barrister turned Director of Public Prosecutions, he enforced the state’s power. Loyalty is optional, principle negotiable, morality expendable. Under Starmer, the UK conducted military surveillance over Gaza (providing intel to Israel to better bomb Gaza) and maintained arms exports while hypocritically calling for a ceasefire.

Since 1995 Israel repeatedly claimed that Iran was weeks from a nuclear weapon, yet Iran complied with the 2015 JCPOA deal until the U.S. broke it in 2018. The UK made token efforts to preserve the deal but backed U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities in 2025, framing it as a “grave threat” despite Iran posing no imminent danger. Basically Starmer ignores agreements and international law when its not convenient. Starmer’s approach mirrors his treatment of people: transactional and expedient. He abandons commitments and international law when convenient. Later, when the U.S. attacked Venezuela on dubious claims, Starmer again deferred to Washington rather than condemning the operation. It has now emerged that Starmer knew Peter Mandelson had continued ties to Jeffrey Epstein when he appointed him as the UK’s ambassador to the United States — and pressed ahead anyway. If leading a government is like an exam, Starmer has failed so spectacularly that his removal now seems inevitable, whether from this issue or the next (and there are several, not including Brexit blowbacks) that exposes his transactional, no‑morality worldview. I only hope the wind that blew him to our doorsteps blows again in order to remove him from the top job and UK politics altogether.

But Ferdia you cannot predict these things! ->> https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=96366683&f=119


When intelligence agencies or Israeli officials state that Iran is 'weeks away' from a nuclear weapon, they are explicitly talking about the breakout time the precise timeframe required to enrich enough weapon-grade uranium for a single nuclear device if they choose to do so. They have never meant 'an operational missile is literally arriving on a truck next month
Member
Posts: 56,497
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 564,336.57
Jun 12 2026 11:09am
When intelligence agencies or Israeli officials state that Iran is 'weeks away' from a nuclear weapon, they are explicitly talking about the breakout time the precise timeframe required to enrich enough weapon-grade uranium for a single nuclear device if they choose to do so. They have never meant 'an operational missile is literally arriving on a truck next month


The best way for me to respond to this would be :

The resignation of Armed forces minister Al Carns and Defence Secretary John Healey was on the basis that they (and their predecessors) felt the UK Government was not pumping enough money into the Defence industry to prepare for an imminent war/threat with or from Russia. England is simply not ready for a full on war. In comparison, Israel has always maintained a heightened state of alertness and has taken decisive action throughout the decades when it deemed its enemies were close to a threshold deemed too dangerous. England does not have that luxury (noting Russia already has Nukes) but nevertheless it firmly believes in its relevance related to conflict with Russia, and on that basis, it has critics arguing daily for more funding for defence.

(this was me steering back on track).

This post was edited by ferdia on Jun 12 2026 11:10am
Member
Posts: 56,497
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 564,336.57
Jun 19 2026 03:28am
Since winning the general election by an overwhelming majority, the Labour government has faced growing criticism over both its foreign and domestic policies. Much of that criticism has been directed at Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has struggled to stem declining public support and internal discontent. A central problem for Labour has been the lack of a credible alternative to Starmer within the party. While several figures have attracted attention, none had established themselves as a serious leadership contender. That may now be changing with the emergence of Andy Burnham. His victory in the Makerfield by-election has returned him to Westminster and placed him in a position to mount a credible challenge to Starmer's leadership.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev134567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll