Im no fan of Starmer but …

[BettyWhittaker]

I am very anti - Labour government, have never voted Labour in my life and never would and I hope an early GE is called …

BUT - AIBU to think he really couldn’t have handled Trump any better than he had? Christ the man is completely unhinged, his behaviour is getting worse and worse - AIBU to think Starmer really couldn’t have done more to handle this?

I thought his statement yesterday was pretty good. Let’s just hope the mad man gets taken out of office before he kicks off another bloody war

Not just Farage, Badenoch backed Trump on Chagos, Davey wants the UK to stard a trade war with the US, Polanski wants the end of Nato.

So yes, Starmer took the correct approach in standing up to Trump.

You know as well as I do there are posters like that on MN

I don’t actually and if there were I’d be able to identify them. Just as I could name half a dozen posters who would never credit him whatever he did. As it is I can’t think of any posters who have never criticised Starmer.

Of course Badenoch drew attention to Trump’s attack on the Chagos agreement. It’s a shit deal and she wants to stop it!

I know she does

She could have said something when she was in Government drawing up the deal.

Of course Badenoch backed Trump on Chagos. He adopted her position, not the other way around. She has been consistent on Chagos since becoming loto.

Starmer did not 'stand up to Trump', He kept his powder dry which was the right thing to do.

Thats arguable but at this time, shows crass political judgement to turn on Starmer.... she didn't draw attention... she backed Trump....

Her party, inc when she was in Govt, had 11 rounds of talks over handing back Chagos, she says she wouldn't have done this deal but she does not say which deal she would have backed.... or the one they were happy to sign off on.

It seems to me, that the Cons laid down the parameters of the current deal, if not let her tell us what they were?

That wasn’t a Tory deal. They came to no agreement. And I’ve made clear that I think the Tories were wrong to consider the ICJ opinion as worth bothering with.

I don’t know what Badenoch’s view on Chagos talks was when she was in government, but on the hypothetical basis that she didn’t oppose…there is more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents..

So she u-turned on Chagos since becoming loto?
She has also been consistent in her support for Trump

Starmer didn't keep his powder dry, he made his stance clear on Greenland. Held back on tariffs which was the right thing to do, I agree.

Yep she and others knew it was a bad deal before Trump agreed.

Your arguments don't make sense. How can Badenoch u turn on a deal that she didn't sign? Her position has been consistent on Chagos since she became leader. Of course she will agree if another leader adopts her position. What would you expect her to do?

Starmer absolutely did keep his/our powder dry on Greenland, thank goodness. Badenoch backed his stance on Greenland. Davey wanted Starmer to 'stand up to Trump'.

Chagos was an oven ready deal that just needed singing off.

Unless you are crediting Labour for getting the whole deal done in a couple months?

"On 3 November 2022, the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, James Cleverly, stated that the United Kingdom and Mauritius had committed to negotiating an agreement based on international law (ICJ) to resolve outstanding issues, including those concerning the former inhabitants of the Chagos Archipelago.
This agreement aims to strengthen bilateral cooperation on regional and global security challenges, particularly in the Indian Ocean. Key areas of focus include maritime security, environmental conservation, climate change, human rights, and efforts to combat illegal migration, fishing, drug, and arms trafficking"

"Cleverly also reaffirmed that any agreement would ensure the continued effective operation of the joint UK-US military base on Diego Garcia, recognizing its strategic importance.
The negotiations will also consider the interests of key regional partners, including the United States and India.
The UK and Mauritius have agreed to engage in constructive discussions with the goal of reaching an agreement by early next year...."

So the Tories agreed in principal, to exactly the same deal as Labour signed off on.... yet now its the deal from Hell....

Labour shouldn’t have dismissed the objections to it.

Who signed the deal, Labour or the Conservatives?
Who is currently defending the deal, Labour or the Conservatives?

Here is the deal we negotiated when in power but now we object to it?

Really? You can prove the terms and the money were all agreed can you?

What Alexandra quoted doesn’t come anywhere close to an agreement.

A new leader can take a new position, they often do of course.

Kemi opposed before Trump did. Labour should have listened to her and many others who did.

I recall posters praising it on here too.

I don't think telling Trump "We will not yield" refusing to rule out Tariffs and backing the rights of Denmark and Greenlanders is "Keeping our powder dry"

She was party to 2 years of talks on Chagos, with the same aims as was signed off on.
As i posted, the Cons set the parameters and goals for the talks.... & there were no objections at the time, Trump supported the talks and praised the Govt for signing the deal.

Its all political opportunism by Badenoch, if the Tories had won in 2024, she'd now be praising the deal....

I think she probably didn't give Chagos a second thought before Labour got into power. She certainly never mentioned it in the House before 21 November 2024.

Ooh, ooh, I’ve thought of another bonus point for Starmer and a demerit for Badenoch: banning u-16s from social media.

It plainly won’t work and will just look like another stupid and costly governmental gesture. Not good Kemi, D- for this one.

Nope, not debating with you after some of your comments on other threads recently.

I never said it did BUT it set out the parameters and aims... all achieved by signing the deal.

Cleverly even wanted to abide by International Law.

I'm hurt! Stick to Labour isn't working... more your style.... oh yes i remember you now, somewhat fanatical.

Yes, as I keep saying, the ICJ is a joke. The Tories were wrong to give it any time.

Elsewhere on international law, I’d also leave the ECHR, which I’m pleased to see is Tory policy now.

Fair. I’ll engage 😀

I wonder what the public sentiment is on Chagos, because if people think it’s a waste of tax payer money and would like a u turn Starmer won’t help himself with the rhetoric.