The EU debate - Part III

No point getting abusive over it fella. It's a statement aimed at you by several posters across all the EU threads. And despite people's differences, nobody says that about anyone else, certainly nowhere near the level you get accused of it. At some point, you have to realise there's truth in what various posters think about your posts.

Maybe it's your defence mechanism, that's all. People react differently when something they believe gets exposed as inaccurate. Rather than address it they either become abusive or use diversion. People on here tend to do the first; you however tend to do both. Anyway, I doubt you'll take an open mind to that observation either, so I'll leave you to carry on

 

Abusive?

Repeating the same bollocks doesn't stop it still being bollocks.

 

Change Britain has produced a report showing that “a conservative estimate" of the benefits of leaving the EU is £24 billion a year.

It describes as "clean Brexit" - is likely to deliver annual savings of almost £10.4 billion from contributions to the EU budget and £1.2 billion from scrapping "burdensome" regulations, while allowing the UK to forge new trade deals worth £12.3 billion.

The group said its estimate was "very conservative" and that the benefits of withdrawal from the single market and customs union could be as much as £38.6 billion a year.

 

Yes my original post said middle east terrorists target loss of civilian life. IRA tended to see their enemy as the British state (and the protestant paramilitaries). I also stated that it was a generalisation based on IRA coded warnings being an almost weekly occurrence at times in the late seventies / early eighties. I have strong memories of two regents street bombings, a kings cross bombing and Brent Cross bombing, all had a warnings and no one was killed. I also remember being in Edgware general hospital when the casualties from Inglis barracks were brought in and driving past the careers office in North Finchley the day after an army recruitment officer was murdered.

I can't answer your second point as I have no idea what you are on about. All terrorism is equally wrong.

 

Well I feel a lot better now Change Britain have said it will all be good.

 

Is this the same Change Britain who used to be called Vote Leave, by any chance?...

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And he should know!.....

 

Targeting human life is not a particular strategy of just middle eastern terrorists. It has been a strategy of American, South American, European and others. It has been used in both modern and historic times and has been used by other religions and by left and right wing terrorists.
I also remember terrorism in the 1970s. There was a pub bombing where I live in Woolwich and there were bombs that went off in central London during Xmas shopping times.
The Irish terrorists did target killing people ...bombs in pubs, train stations, shopping centres, hotels etc. do target civilians.
Giving a warning was a tactic to help cause disruption not save lives. The IRA and others would phone warnings in knowing that it would cause disruption even though they hadn't planted a bomb.
Your original post compared Isis inspired terrorists with the IRA ... and you claimed the IRA didn't target killing people ... there is a clear implication that therefore the IRA weren't as bad.
That is how it reads to me.

Edit... meant to add that I am sorry if I came across as confrontational...was just chatting...I have a rotten cold so probably have not been as clear as I should have been. Was not trying to imply that you support terrorism of any sort

 

I assumed it was one of Kustard's mates who had changed his name before the referendum.

 

I agree the warnings enabled the IRA to magnify the effect because they did not have to always plant a bomb and their purpose was fear and disruption.

My point was they did not generally go in for plane bombings and attacks that aimed to cause maximum civilian death and I still believe that to be true and reflected in the chart I originally posted and was commenting on.

I'm not going to get into an argument of one terrorist being better of worse than another. The IRA killed, maimed and tortured plenty.

 

I do wonder how modern technology like the access to ideas and weapon building knowledge via the net is responsible for the change in terrorist tactics.
I also think that because they saw themselves as an army with a single cause they followed a chain of command their tactics were more aimed at the army and police and their families.

 

When are you going to offer something to this thread, or are you going to carry on being a Sad Stan light?

 

Stan knew he'd get a mention. He's always in Kustard's thoughts.

 

You pasted an article from the Leave campaign itself who have decided Brexit is going to be a huge success despite the fact they can't make up their minds what Brexit is. It doesn't require any serious critique.

 

I am talking in general, at least make an effort, being a snide is for Sad Stan, so dont be like him.

 

Dos!

 

Fair point, Kustard, despite the ******ed use of the quote function.

In other news, and to balance yours out:

We Are Doomed, a group I just made up, have estimated Brexit will reduce employment by 98% and that there isn't a known number big enough for the loss to the economy, despite this being a conservative prediction.

 

Bollocks

 

& what?

Inflation hasn't YET kicked in, and none of the effects of Brexit are being felt by the consumer - YET, as we've not got on the train - YET.

It's a pointless attempt to portray the post Brexit garden as being rosey, when we've not yet done anything but have a misguided vote.

 

Change Britain

They'd better go have a word with their buddies in the Tory Govt and the Treasury who've already told us it's going to cost £56BN net in the next few years.

File under ****s