Telegraph: Britanniens Sicherheit nicht Corbyn anvertrauen!

Standard

 

10.11.19. Corbyn und Johnson legen am Cenotaph zum Gedenken an die Weltkriege Kränze nieder (Telegraph).

Die britische Tageszeitung “Daily Telegraph” veröffentlicht zum Thema “Jeremy Corbyn, Labour-Chef, und Grossbritanniens Sicherheit” folgenden kritischen Kommentar:

Who do Labour think they are fooling? Jeremy Corbyn has spent his entire political career agitating against British interests. Since he entered Parliament in 1983, he has voted against every military action proposed by a UK government, even objecting to the Nato-led humanitarian intervention in Kosovo. But he is no pacifist: he has rarely failed to give moral succour to the nation’s enemies, the IRA among them.

Labour politicians are not ignorant of Mr Corbyn’s opinions. It is why several have resigned from the party and called on voters to back Boris Johnson. Yet those who remain persist in the pretence that their leader’s views on British military action are irrelevant.

Emily Thornberry und Jeremy Corbyn.

Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, suggested that any decision on whether to launch a nuclear strike, presumably in retaliation, could be made collectively, so there was no need to worry about Mr Corbyn’s prior statement that he would never use nuclear weapons. She also appeared to distance herself from Mr Corbyn’s rejection of British military action, implying that the people around him would restrain the worst of his impulses should he enter No 10.

But Mr Corbyn’s views are not an irrelevance. There are decisions that only a prime minister can make, including rapid judgments about the use of force, whether in response to an attack or to take advantage of a narrow window of opportunity to neutralise a terrorist.

No leader relishes the hard choices such decisions entail. Every indication is, however, that out of misguided ideological purity and a dismal view of Britain itself, Mr Corbyn would refuse to do what is necessary to keep the country safe.