Why do people not like Jeremy Corbyn?

Which terrorists?

And then become the next Alexander Litvinenko.

Terrorism means terrifying and killing civilians.

How nice and simple. The UK and US government have therefore supported many terrorist regimes (as long as they could influence them).

And if asked to condemn Russia bombing London or whatever, the most you'd get out of him is 'all bombings are bad'.

Corbyn would probably sit down with Putin in the House of Commons (assuming it was still in UK hands) and have a nice cup of tea and a chat.

You're very amusing.

Are you sure that he wouldn't be heading up a Stop The War protest march?

I imagine that if Russia attacked, Corbyn would act to defend the country which it would be his duty to do. I doubt even Farage would roll out the red carpet, though I'd hate to put that to the test.

Well, Corbyn blamed NATO when Russia invaded Ukraine and when Russia executed an attack on UK soil with Novichok, Corbyn said that we should send the samples to Russia for Russia to investigate whether it was Russia that was behind the attack. Because he wasn't about to blame them for it even though it was obviously them.

There's a good chance that if Russia attacked the UK, Corbyn would think it was our fault.

Hmm...so he was trying to be PM but "wasn't sure personally whether to be in or out of Europe". ie sat on the fence and did nowt about the biggest question for the UK for decades. No ideals presumably. His protege Starmer learned well.

Disagree re the terrorism. He's a bad man because he can't see right from wrong.Terrorism means terrifying and killing civilians.

You mean what would Corbyn do if Russia attacked? I assumed you were trolling. I'd be more worried about Farage who has actively expressed admiration for Putin.

He doesn't support terrorism, he supports the causes that lead to terrorism.

Nelson Mandela was a terrorist, but his ideals and aims were worth fighting for.

Corbyn is someone who tries to understand where things are going wrong to try to put them right at source. Eg if you can make countries where migrants are coming from a better place for them to live then they won't need to leave.

His ideals make a lot of sense to me. He also has integrity - he wasn't sure personally whether to be in or out of Europe but would democratically do what the majority of his party wanted.

Blair's behaviour actively harmed the UKs security. Terror attacks rose exponentially after the invasion. He's hardly the arbiter of appropriate conduct.

Note the inability to address the actual points made about Corbyn.

That is entirely separate to the GFA, which led to relative peace in NI for the first time in how many years. Iraq was a terrible mistake. The GFA was not.

The same Tony Blair who lied to parliament and embroiled the UK in an illegal war which the 7/7 bombers directly linked to their actions?

A good question to consider in the current climate would be "If Russia attacked the UK, whose side would Corbyn take?"

As Desmond Tutu said, (I think) peace isn't achieved by only taking with your friends.
The thing is, he doesn't engage with HIS enemies. He engages with enemies of the West, whoever they are. They are his friends, and he flatters them, tells them they are right and gives them the impression that he agrees with them, often against the government, especially if they are a Labour government. He engaged with the IRA/SF but not the Loyalists. The Blair government at the time said he actively harmed the negotiations by giving the impression that he was anything to do with the government and had any influence over what was happening when he was just a renegade backbench MP. He engages with Iran but not the US or Israel. He engages with his accolytes and fans at Glastonbury but not people who are sceptical. I suspect Zahra Sultana knows he is little more than an old Middle class Marxist, and she will be treating him as an ineffectual talisman for this party, when she wants the real power. Therefore leading to a 'split' in the party before its even started.

Yes, I agree. I blame Cameron for Brexit. But Labour under a better leader would have achieved a victory for Remain.

Corbyn is antisemitic and presided over an antisemitic culture in the party. He may or may not be a good constituency MP but he was a terrible Labour leader and Leader of the Opposition.

His version of socialism is based around ideas from the 1970s that didn’t work very well then, won’t work now, and are mainly for the benefit of white men, as that is the paradigm he seems to work in.

I also think his behaviour shows a degree of arrogance and shirking of responsibility that while not unusual among politicians, is something I strongly dislike about him.

I posted this on another thread where a Corbyn fan said 'yes you dislike him, but what about his politics'? And they never came back to me about a single thing in it. They're always going on about smears and lies and anti-Corbyn campaigns in the media but refuse to acknowledge that there are genuine problems with his politics and attitude.

Anti-West stance
Corbyn hates the West. He will automatically side with any country that also hates the West and that means he would be disastrous for the defence of the country. As I have posted before, this led to him suggesting that Assad gassed his own people, that we should allow Russia to investigate whether they were behind the novichok poisoning in Salisbury, and he blamed NATO for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Iran is anti-west, so of course Corbyn has made several appearances on Iranian government TV.

Hanging out with terrorists
His rabidly Anti-West stance means that Corbyn spends a lot of time in the company of undesirables. Famously spent a lot of time with the IRA (a file opened on him by MI5 as a potential threat to national security), inviting two people who had been in prison for IRA-related offences to the House of Commons just after the Brighton bombings. Who else did he invite to the House of Commons? His "friends" in Hamas and Hezbollah.
Here he is saying that the British government labelling Hamas as terrorists would be a big historical mistake because Hamas are just working for peace in the region https://x.com/timescorbyn/status/1724186336922386655?s=61&t=U9XrcF693-JpMxeIueYG7g
Post October 7th, who does it appear was making a big mistake with that statement? Not Corbyn of course- he was asked by Piers Morgan to label Hamas as terrorists and he refused https://x.com/piersmorgan/status/1724169911415504901?s=61&t=U9XrcF693-JpMxeIueYG7g

That's because the hard left when challenged dig in

Brexit
Anti-West Corbyn is obviously not a fan of the EU. Perhaps that was why he made such a balls-up of Brexit policy post referendum that contributed to the election defeat against Boris Johnson who at least had a clear view. https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-corbyns-changing-brexit-stance

Corbyn before Party
Post-Brexit referendum he lost a no-confidence vote of his own MPs by 172-40. Did he resign, having lost the confidence of his colleagues? Of course not. He then led Labour to an election defeat against Theresa May. Did he then resign? No, he then led Labour to a crushing election defeat against Boris Johnson. Could a different leader with a strong stance on Brexit have taken on Johnson? Possibly. They could hardly have done worse (Labour's worst electoral defeat since 1935) - Corbyn was named as a big problem for Labour by many voters. Did he then resign? No, he said he wanted to stay on during a period of reflection. What a tit.

Blindspot for antisemitism
Antisemtism was a huge problem in the Labour Party under Corbyn and was poorly dealt with. Corbyn denied this, and the 130 page report detailing it. Calling the report overblown was what (rightly) got him kicked out of Labour. The famous anti-racist campaigner didn't support Luciana Berger, one of his own MPs who was the victim of vicious antisemitic attacks. People rightly criticise Starmer for his treatment of Rosie Duffield, but the template for the handling of Duffield was Luciana Berger. This blindspot for antisemitism is a direct consequence of his anti-West stance (which is of course automatically anti-Israel) which leads him to be around so many actively open antisemites (e.g. Hamas) that he just doesn't recognise it as a problem.

I agree with you completely, and I have never been a conservative voter anyway and am very anti brexit. But he was still on a different level to what the conservatives have now become.

Norman Tebbit said of the notorious meeting, “Well, of course, I was still not quite conscious in the Brighton hospital when Jeremy Corbyn invited IRA men to the House of Commons for tea.”

5 people dead. 31 injured. And he brings the terrorists to their place of work. That takes a certain type of personality.

(Disclaimer: I am a lifelong Labour voter).

Jeremy Corbyn is only interested in preaching to the choir. He surrounds himself with head-nodders, and meets with people who already agree with him, and who he agrees with.

He is not a serious politician, and he is not serious about governing, in the sense that governments need to create a sense of unity. He stands for division (like Farage).

He did fuck all in the Brexit campaign (because he didn’t agree with European unity).

If he was really interested in people and issues, he’d spend his time speaking to people who disagree with him, or at least don’t share his Islington-centric perspectives.

The dangerous thing about Corby is that he comes across with a level of charm compared with some politicians- John Mcdonald for example .

Ultimately the conflict was only ended by engaging with those considered terrorists. Corbyn just tried to do it 20 years too soon.