By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I think there *is* a parallel with Churchill. Both leaders thrived on crisis.
Both failed in their ultimate goal. Churchill failed in his goal of preserving the British Empire. Thatcher failed in her goal of reviving the British economy.
Thatcher was just a self important, patronising kunt. She didnt give a feck for the masses. Good riddance, and as for a minutes silence, dont make me laugh.
At least we will be spared from your posts while you will be out fighting the Anti-Thatcherists?
"The anti-thatcherists" how laughable is that, people who are angry at current government policy, blaming someone who was in power 20-30 years ago. Haven't they realised that there has been a Labour government since who screwed up the economy? Has no one told them about the mess the country was in prior to Thatcher taking over - not even the dead were being buried.. They remind me of QPR fans who even though the club has messed up big time, the fans blame others such as Tango & Cash, referees, FA, bad luck, fate etc,
I guarantee that a huge precentage of those protesting are from middle class backgrounds. They've had the benefit of growing up in decent housing and having a decent education - no gangs, drugs and high unemployment on their street corners yet they will protest to give themselves a social conscious.
Wouldn't their free time be better served by helping those who are less fortunate? eg Lobbying councils who are planning to shut down youth centres or assisting at after school clubs. No, they are not interested in doing something meaningful and constructive for society.
All we need now is the father of Champagne Socialism Billy Bragg, to strum a few out of tune notes on his guitar before fleeing back to the comfort of his private estate in the Devon countryside.
As for me fighting the so called Anti-Thatcherists, I don't believe in violence and protests which are a waste of time. Trafalgar Square should be cordoned off for the day.
"The anti-thatcherists" how laughable is that, people who are angry at current government policy, blaming someone who was in power 20-30 years ago. Haven't they realised that there has been a Labour government since who screwed up the economy? Has no one told them about the mess the country was in prior to Thatcher taking over - not even the dead were being buried.. They remind me of QPR fans who even though the club has messed up big time, the fans blame others such as Tango & Cash, referees, FA, bad luck, fate etc,
I guarantee that a huge precentage of those protesting are from middle class backgrounds. They've had the benefit of growing up in decent housing and having a decent education - no gangs, drugs and high unemployment on their street corners yet they will protest to give themselves a social conscious.
Wouldn't their free time be better served by helping those who are less fortunate? eg Lobbying councils who are planning to shut down youth centres or assisting at after school clubs. No, they are not interested in doing something meaningful and constructive for society.
All we need now is the father of Champagne Socialism Billy Bragg, to strum a few out of tune notes on his guitar before fleeing back to the comfort of his private estate in the Devon countryside.
As for me fighting the so called Anti-Thatcherists, I don't believe in violence and protests which are a waste of time. Trafalgar Square should be cordoned off for the day.
"Wouldn't their free time be better served by helping those who are less fortunate? eg Lobbying councils who are planning to shut down youth centres or assisting at after school clubs. No, they are not interested in doing something meaningful and constructive for society. "
Of course it would, and a lot of them have, but everyone deserves a day off every now and then, and nobody in their right mind should object to taking a Saturday afternoon off to celebrate the such a joyous event as the death of a despot
"The anti-thatcherists" how laughable is that, people who are angry at current government policy, blaming someone who was in power 20-30 years ago. Haven't they realised that there has been a Labour government since who screwed up the economy? Has no one told them about the mess the country was in prior to Thatcher taking over - not even the dead were being buried.. They remind me of QPR fans who even though the club has messed up big time, the fans blame others such as Tango & Cash, referees, FA, bad luck, fate etc,
I guarantee that a huge precentage of those protesting are from middle class backgrounds. They've had the benefit of growing up in decent housing and having a decent education - no gangs, drugs and high unemployment on their street corners yet they will protest to give themselves a social conscious.
Wouldn't their free time be better served by helping those who are less fortunate? eg Lobbying councils who are planning to shut down youth centres or assisting at after school clubs. No, they are not interested in doing something meaningful and constructive for society.
All we need now is the father of Champagne Socialism Billy Bragg, to strum a few out of tune notes on his guitar before fleeing back to the comfort of his private estate in the Devon countryside.
As for me fighting the so called Anti-Thatcherists, I don't believe in violence and protests which are a waste of time. Trafalgar Square should be cordoned off for the day.
Actually, I was just looking forward to being spared from your posts.
Really, I blame T&C for so much of our predicament. We went into a stupid 'who can we get at short notice to bolster our squad?' predicament, and that continued with Hughes. He failed to set up a decent squad before the season start this seaswon and that is why we are where we are now.
SpiritofGregory has a way with words, you can't deny that.
I am not sure if Bragg *is* a Socialist (he might be). I think his main thing is getting back to 1945 when 'we were all in it together', and as far as he is concerned the Tories have wrecked all that. Therefore he wants to keep the Tories out of power at any price (e.g. a more moderate pro-capitalist party would do the trick).
You can see how this obsession has driven him round the bend from this clip he made during the public sector workers strikes in 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16001833 (about 3 minutes long) He comes to the deranged conclusion that the Liberals are going to rebel against the Tories (he calls their alliance 'the cardboard coalition') and thus 'save' the public sector workers.
You'd have to concede that overwhelmingly preserving a free Britain was above preserving the British Empire and he succeeded with that.
As for Thatcher reviving the British economy, it 'happened', you just have to argue over cause-and-effect/ cost-and-benefit.
While Thatcher was in office the trade deficit went from £549 million to £19 billion.
On Churchill, all I was really saying was that Churchill didn't achieve his fundamental goal. Britain was stripped of Empire and leadership passed to America.
"They remind me of QPR fans who even though the club has messed up big time, the fans blame others such as Tango & Cash, referees, FA, bad luck, fate etc, "
Errr so who should they blame? - you seem to suggest that they can't blame others and so should blame themselves, i e. the fans are to blame for what you call the club having messed up big time. How exaclty?
While Thatcher was in office the trade deficit went from £549 million to £19 billion.
On Churchill, all I was really saying was that Churchill didn't achieve his fundamental goal. Britain was stripped of Empire and leadership passed to America.
The Americans deliberately destroyed the British Empire.Too much of a threat.
While Thatcher was in office the trade deficit went from £549 million to £19 billion.
On Churchill, all I was really saying was that Churchill didn't achieve his fundamental goal. Britain was stripped of Empire and leadership passed to America.
Jeez, TR, I didn't realise how blind you were. He ultimately wanted to win that war, and he was prepared to indicate to countries like Australia that their war wasn't a priority. He did that and was absolutely right to do so.
Jeez, TR, I didn't realise how blind you were. He ultimately wanted to win that war, and he was prepared to indicate to countries like Australia that their war wasn't a priority. He did that and was absolutely right to do so.
You'd be surprised by how blind I can be . I wasn't saying that Churchill didn't have good reason to do what he did, or that he could have done anything else (except surrender of course). I am just saying that he didn't achieve his ultimate goal.
I would say that Australia did remain part of the British Empire (tastefully rebranded as 'The Commonwealth'). (On a separate note, I had a very unhealthy fascination with the Commonwealth Institute as a child).
You'd be surprised by how blind I can be . I wasn't saying that Churchill didn't have good reason to do what he did, or that he could have done anything else (except surrender of course). I am just saying that he didn't achieve his ultimate goal.
I would say that Australia did remain part of the British Empire (tastefully rebranded as 'The Commonwealth'). (On a separate note, I had a very unhealthy fascination with the Commonwealth Institute as a child).
And I'm just saying that WS was ten times, no, one hundred times, the leader that MT was.
The Americans deliberately destroyed the British Empire.Too much of a threat.
What? They started the second world war, to deplete British resources, meaning running an empire would be beyond our postwar means? And they'd spent decades fomenting unrest in the British dominions, encouraging people to question the idea of being ruled by an alien race from several thousands miles away? I don't think the people in the Empire needed any help from the Americans to want self-determination.
And I'm just saying that WS was ten times, no, one hundred times, the leader that MT was.
Stop being this about she how a leader she was.
She was a c*nt. End of.
Though it tends to get forgotten that Churchill was a disaster at more or less everything he did politically apart from the 40-45 premiership (one of the worst peacetime PMs ever). Fortunately, the one thing he was good at was precisely what Britain needed at the time.
What? They started the second world war, to deplete British resources, meaning running an empire would be beyond our postwar means? And they'd spent decades fomenting unrest in the British dominions, encouraging people to question the idea of being ruled by an alien race from several thousands miles away? I don't think the people in the Empire needed any help from the Americans to want self-determination.
Eh?Starting WW2 to deplete Britain?So where does Hitler and Japan come into it?
Though it tends to get forgotten that Churchill was a disaster at more or less everything he did politically apart from the 40-45 premiership (one of the worst peacetime PMs ever). Fortunately, the one thing he was good at was precisely what Britain needed at the time.
No argument. Absolutely no reason in the whole wide world he should be compared with the egregious Thatcher.
I thought you didn't like bringing Hitler onto a thread?
It's got boring now.But satellite channels will have documentaries ad nauseam about Thatch from now on - same as Hitler.Wonder who's picking up the royalties for Adolf? Going to earn the Thatch estate a fortune.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
