Forum menu
Saw this poster this week and it really made my blood boil...
[img] 
[/img]
So, whatever your views, where's the linkage between political reform and this sort of hysterical nonsense?
- Defence spending may be (previously?) leaving soldiers without the kit they need, but really, are they going to go without due to a direct linkage with political reform costs???
- If the "first past the post" system hadn't so eroded consensus government, then our forces [i]probably[/i] wouldn't have been involved in some of the recent US campaigns - and even if they had, there would have been clearer representation of popular support through a representative, democratic, political system.
I SAY HE NEEDS HIS KIT - [b]AND[/b] A MORE REPRESENTATIVE ELECTORAL SYSTEM
Perhaps under a more representative electoral system he wouldn't need a bulletproof vest at all.
But then how many MPs voted against war in Iraq?
I can't stan these posters, here's some pedantic reasons...
I'm fairly sure thats an american soldier, more recent troops may be able to correct me, but none of my desert kit looked like that!
The baby who "needs maternity wards" Doesn't, she's already been born!
After that, I know its a lot to ask, but what I'd really like from british politics is information rather than hysteria. If the poster said "Its going to cost a lot of money to transfer the system to AV, and the current system is good enough" I'd have no problems with it. Daily mail/express hysterical stupidity.
Perhaps under a more representative electoral system he wouldn't need a bulletproof vest at all.
My point, exactly. That is what made me so mad.
Terrible advert.
The worst part is that the MOD had more than enough money to pay for everything we needed, carriers, JSF, Typhoon, FRES, Nimrod....the ****ing works. It's just that they're incapable of not spunking gargantuam sums of money up the wall and have allowed BAE to run rings around their procurement bods for decades.
There is something bizarrely amusing about the leap-of-logic in these ads, though.
"He needs a proper climbing harness... not fishfingers."
bravohotel8er - Member
Terrible advert.The worst part is that the MOD had more than enough money to pay for everything we needed, carriers, JSF, Typhoon, FRES, Nimrod....the **** works. It's just that they're incapable of not spunking gargantuam sums of money up the wall and have allowed BAE to run rings around their procurement bods for decades.
Agreed on both parts.
The AV system is very close to that used to select Ed Millibean as leader of the Labour Party. That's how dangerous it is.
Makes me want to vote yes in the referendum.
I can't make it out on the poster, but does anyone know who's funding it?
I feel the need to send some abuse.
but does anyone know who's funding it
an unwholly alliance of the Labour and Conservative parties would be my betting 😉
What a ridiculously tenuous link between voting rights for the whole population and the needs of a group of soldiers who have been short-changed by the ineptitude of the MoD - I read somewhere recently the MoD wasted £23 billion in botched procurement programmes (could have bought everyone in the country a bullet proof vest for that amount).
ScottChegg - Member
The AV system is very close to that used to select Ed Millibean as leader of the Labour Party. That's how dangerous it is.
You are either ill-informed or well informed and mischievous...
The Labour Party, any political party, is a very different electorate that the UK population....
Which system is the "right" system is probably unclear to many of the electorate, myself included - but it is clear that several generations of politicians have abused their electoral power.
A system that introduces a better reflection of the broad range of views and beliefs held by the British people has to be a good thing. If that means that there is no clear "first past the post" one party takes all winner in the House of Commons, then that too should be a good thing. Make the buggers debate the merits and drawbacks of various policies and courses of action before foisting them on the electorate (after all the HoC is a debating chamber...?).
One thing is clear (too me) though - the poster above is a disgrace in terms of a referendum on the voting system.
Tea? anyone?
You are either ill-informed or well informed and mischievous...
None of those ........just infantile. The clue was in the puerile name taunting which is most commonly associated with the school playground, rather than grown-up political debate.
but does anyone know who's funding it
No2Av is funding it. Although they won't release details of their donors, despite claiming that they want to see more "transparency" in politics.
BTW, the £250 million claim appears to be false, as does the claim that British troops don't receive bullet-proof vests. At least the MOD claims that bullet-proof vests are "standard issue in Afghanistan"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8115327.stm
[b][i]"Current Army directives state that all soldiers must wear the latest Osprey body armour and Mark 6 Alpha helmets in any combat situation"[/i][/b]