Off Topic Great Britain General Election May 7th 2015.

I said one line and someone forced me to elaborate.. then someone else questioned my eloboration and it just snowballed

 

I can't be bothered to go into any sort of depth on this one sisu, at least not at the moment, it's been a long day at work!

I'll leave it by saying I think it's clear we both have wildly different ideas about British History and can't imagine we would ever agree on many topics of British history. You are clearly of the "grrr imperialist Britain" variety and I think the British empire gave the world the seeds of industrialisation and globalisation that laid the foundations for the modern world. We are at opposite ends of the spectrum here I think

 

I think it is obvious that I am not grr impreialist Britain, the empire is long gone my friend, I too am knacked, too tired otherwise I would have been more detailed in my posts.

This is a thread about politics and yes, politicians are pieces of ****, this just happens to be a British politics thread.

Anyone and his dog knows I hate imperialism, end of. Britain is not an Empire or even w world military power (nukes apart) There is nothing to hate in that context, maybe pity that a once pround nation whores itself out to America. Well, really I dont care, nationalism is for eejits needing to belong

You mistake my dislike of the elite exploiting everyone else, no matter which country it is, and the joke that is politics.


besides ask anyone here, "what country does Sisu hate" and I guarnatee you the answer will be either Israel or Murrica.

 

Wow what a melt down, I really shouldn't dignify this with a response given that there are so many contradictions and inaccuracies in that post. Mind I have some time on my hands.

So you think that it was ok for the Argentines to 'occupy' the Falklands then? Do you seriously believe that the military junta would have negotiated a settlement that would have been acceptable to any British Government? If so we should end the conversation here on this subject as you obviously don't have any reasoning powers and will just regurgitate what's written on some conspiracy website.

I take it you don't believe in self determination despite endlessly spouting off at all of the worlds injustices. Your comment about not having any relatives who died in the Falklands is extremely crass considering that you don't know anything about me.

You say I don't know anything about World War 2 and then cherry pick a list of battles and convienantly ignore some fantastic military successes like El Alamein (that's in Africa that you list as a failure), the Battle of Britain (can't remember the Americans helping us out too much with that one) and D-Day. You do realise that World War 2 was a national fight for survival and so there were always going to be battles that didn't work out. You can't win them all.

As for the military leadership messing up in Iraq, no doubt there were mistakes made of which some were political that had a negative impact on the military deployment. It cannot be denied that these painful lessons were learnt and had a far reaching benefits on the deployment to Afghanistan.

You slag off the military campaign in Yugoslavia and conveniently do not mention the ethnic cleansing that was going on there. Should the world stand by and let that go on? What would you do? Same with Libya, Gaddafi was killing his own people and so I am not sorry he's gone, but I am sorry that our incompetent Government did not foresee the dangers of intervening and implement measures to support a peaceful transition.

Your comments on Churchill are frankly laughable and not worthy of a response.

 

We and by we I mean NATO did **** all whilst ethnic cleansing was going on in Yugoslavia,we did **** all about the murder of thousand in Sebrenica (?) in Bosnia.We only got involved over Kosovo.The behaviour of the whole world community over events in Yugoslavia was shameful

 

In the Danzig corridor, don't you know....

 

It was all those German immigrants taking all the Poles jobs
#ukiphistory

 

Na, they were Falkland Islanders not British, they were classed as
"British Dependent Territories citizens", the same as Hong Kong citizens.

 

Sorry, came in at the back of this discussion. Do you mean the Rueben James? Of course it was used as bait (as was the Luisitania in WWI). The US were becoming more and more frustrated by unrestricted submarine warfare on their doorstep, and FDR saw only one solution long term. He was right - in the US's interests more than anyone's.

Btw, it wasn't Goering's decision the switch to bombing civillians, it was Hitler's. Yes, Goering told him it would work, but only because he wanted a diversion himself as false intelligence was underestimating the crippling effect of loss of pilots the attacking of airfields was causing. Hitler got hysterical though over a puny raid on Berlin that in itself was a token response to a Heinkel ditching its unused bombs on London after a navigational error during a night-bombing raid. Ironically, the crew were court-marshalled as Goering had forbidden the bombing of London.

In all you lists of failures, you've left out the biggest of WWII - Singapore. But you've also missed two of the biggest turning points of WWII, without which, and the US involvement that was later followed by them, even the Soviets would have eventually collapsed: Battle of Britain, but more importantly, the Battle of the Atlantic. The Royal Navy, especially assisted by the Royal Canadian Navy and those navies of the Caribbean colonies, won the Battle of the Atlantic, despite of, and not because of, the shambolic early intervention the US Atlantic fleet - obviously the cream of the USN were fighting in the Pacific.

Oh, and keeping the Atlantic sea lanes open were not helped in two world wars by your countrymen supplying the U-boats. And for all his faults, at least Edward VIII didn't send a telegram of condolence to Doenitz on the occasion of Hitler's suicide, unlike De Valera.

 

Thought it was funny when they were handing Hong Kong back to China, and the right-wing papers tried ton start a panic by saying that as HK had the same status as the Falklands, technically 100k's of them could come to the UK on their passports. Nobody asked the HK Chinese though - most of them weren't interested into coming into what they thought an un-enterprising country, and wanted to know if they could use their passports to go to Australia, Canada and NZ.

 

Don't know what else you'd expect donga, Britain slaughtered and starved the Irish people for centuries, that reaction was a backlash.

 

Ukip will keep defence spending at 2 per cent of GDP
David Cameron has failed our armed forces and defending our country has fallen by the wayside. Ukip is the only true party of defence

please log in to view this image

 

If you read the post I was responding to you will see that it was the suggestion that the British Military was only interested in bombing defenceless countries. The Yugoslavia example was used by the poster as a stick to beat the British military due to his obsession to identify failings. The British military did not only get involved in Kosovo as you suggest as we were deployed in that region as part of NATO, UNPROFOR, IFOR and SFOR before that.

The military failings (especially the Dutch) in stopping the atrocity at Srebrenica are well documented and I'm certainly not going to defend them here. But I would like to think that there was some good done there too which may have prevented others from sharing a similar fate.

 

If I remember correctly Thatcher changed the law to stop the Falkland Islanders being full British citizens

 

Thatcher and her disciples like to take the credit for the Falklands conflict but don't forget it was her government's cuts to the defence budget that withdrew the Royal Navy ship that permanently patrolled the waters around the Falklands.If i remember correctly there was also a detachment of Royal Marines permanently based on the Falklands which was also withdrawn.

 

If it wasn't for foreigners such as the Ghurkhas more British people could join the army
#ukiplogic

 

VOTERS in England last night found themselves terrorised and seduced by a medium sized Scottish woman.
As SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon was released across the UK, English viewers of the election debate said they found her deeply threatening ‘but in a good way’.
Jane Thompson, from Hatfield, said: “She’s a combination of Suzi Quatro and Sir Alex Ferguson. But I understand that all Scottish women are exactly like that.
“Noisy, efficient and utterly merciless.”
Julian Cook, from Finsbury Park, said: “She’s strong like Thatcher, but with a human touch that says, ‘I’m going to let you live, but on my terms’.
“She will now conquer us because we are led by M&S mannequins that don’t even have heads.
“But I think Sturgeon’s will be a mostly benign dictatorship and I have no objection to adopting vile Scottish habits if that becomes the law.”

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/polit...wn-to-terrifying-scottish-woman-2015040397044

 

WMD=Woman of massive destruction.

 

There are three kinds of people in this world; those that can count and those that can't