There's a difference between what the Conservatives say and what they do - that's where the debate lies. If a party talks a left-wing game (which the Tories don't, but whatever) and plays a right-wing one, then they're a right-wing party.
But they're still party policy to maintain them, therefore that is what the Government pro-actively ensuring. Sure, you might disagree about the semantics, how they're doing it and to what ends, but the point it is Government policy to maintain the NHS and welfare structure.
It's not a competition, why would we want to waste money on the military when we're already 4th in overall spending?
Because we're only 5th in terms of capability. With how well we train our troops, it should be our obligation to equip them better to. Furthermore, what we do spend on equipping our troops is managed so very badly, for instance the Type 45s currently sitting in Portsmouth doing nothing except wasting money on refits. Additionally, our military capability is a huge part of what makes us and other countries have significance on the global stage, we should have more capability to pursue national interest in foreign policy.
That's how wars start and the Conservative government was pro both motions. Do you have any examples of the Tories "not actively involving us in any conflicts even if it is in our national interest" as you claimed, or where you just talking out of your arse?
Pretty big leap in logic (something you seem to be consistently showing) there but I'll roll with it. Paris, November 2015. That should have been our wake up call to take up arms and eradicate ISIS, but we didn't because modern politicians are too career focused and nowhere near enough are man enough to take risks like stepping up involvement in Iraq and Syria (i.e, putting boots on the ground.)
That's hilariously naive if you actually believe that. Us and the US have been "acting with force" in Iraq and Afghanistan
Stupid comparison. The ending situation would be the same (a guerilla war) but ISIS has their validation from being a Caliphate, a nation-like state. Crush that, crush their standing army, and their validity is irrevocably destroyed
The leave and stay sides of the EU debate are populated by people from both sides of the political spectrum. Some of the Conservatives being pro-stay is not an indication of left-wing politics anyway.
But it is Government and all parties policies to stay in the EU. And yes it is, wanting to stay in the globalist organisation known as the EU is a left wing/liberal viewpoint
You're showing your inability to understand the political spectrum again
Am I? Pray tell, how? A leftist would want to support those refugees as they support freedom of movement and a globalist agenda, those on the right seek to protect their own country, even if it means turning away asylum seekers
That's one of the saddest things I think I've ever read,
How many times do you think we need to watch scenes unfold like Paris, Turkey, Tunisia, Cologne, California etc before we realise there is a big problem with Islam and we can't afford to let just anyone in. Sure, most of them are probably okay, but will be a drain on resources here plus the fact there is no way of telling who's good and who's bad
immigration
The stock of the migrant population almost doubled from 1993 to 2014, coinciding with left wing governments being in place. I'm just not convinced you're correct.
The trend is towards them not being state subsidised.
Irrelevant, they are still state subsidised and will continue to be so