In reply to Post #749
Are you blind? #743 I put them very simply to you
You really are stupid.
Reclaim the islands as British. The purpose of going there. Not to export democracy like you stated before. If it was to reinstate democracy solely then that would concede the islands are Argentinian and the entirety of Argentina would have been invaded. But it wasn't. Your spin is worse than the MSM
Are you blind? #743 I put them very simply to you
You really are stupid. Reclaim the islands as British. The purpose of going there. Not to export democracy like you stated before. If it was to reinstate democracy solely then that would concede the islands are Argentinian and the entirety of Argentina would have been invaded. But it wasn't. Your spin is worse than the MSM
In reply to Post #750
Right there
I said that earlier, straight down the middle might be just about alright
Right there
I said that earlier, straight down the middle might be just about alright
In reply to Post #751
Would we have gone if the population didn't want to remain a British overseas territory? No is the answer. Democracy allows the population to decide who governs them. They democratically on several occasions have rejected changing the status quo.
So for dummies: To allow the population of the Falklands to democratically decide their future we had to kick the undemocratic military junta out. Simple even for you.
Post 743
Would we have gone if the population didn't want to remain a British overseas territory? No is the answer. Democracy allows the population to decide who governs them. They democratically on several occasions have rejected changing the status quo.
So for dummies: To allow the population of the Falklands to democratically decide their future we had to kick the undemocratic military junta out. Simple even for you.
Post 743
In reply to Post #753
For it to remain a British sovereign state is what you mean. If it had been a non-sovereign state and Argentina took it over would we have gone? Answer is no. Nout to do with democracy, everything to do with keeping British influence overseas. Democracy being a by-product of that. Simple enough for even your tiny mind to understand.
Again, won't answer the questions because you've got no answers for them because you know I'm right
For it to remain a British sovereign state is what you mean. If it had been a non-sovereign state and Argentina took it over would we have gone? Answer is no. Nout to do with democracy, everything to do with keeping British influence overseas. Democracy being a by-product of that. Simple enough for even your tiny mind to understand.
Again, won't answer the questions because you've got no answers for them because you know I'm right
In reply to Post #743
1-The UAE and Jordan are and have always been allies in the region. Bigger fish to fry elsewhere but we keep chipping away.
2-Cuba is Uncle Sam's neck of the woods an ally of ours. That'll take care of itself shortly.
3-Saudi and Qatar have had the world by the plums for decades with oil. The long term view was they were handy allies. As you'll know both have problems with Wahhabi extremists helping fund and destabilize the middle east. MBS is dealing with this(locking sympathetic donors up in hotels etc) alongside a modernisation program. They are also very handy regards intelligence and dealing with ISIS recently. Which is why they're being cut some slack. Also being deadly enemies of the Shia works for us. Again one for the long haul.
4-China, North Korea and Vietnam. You really need me for that? You'd have to be pretty stupid to not understand why we wouldn't go to war unless as a last resort. The pressure for human rights, getting them involved in world monetary systems and building a coalition of democracies against them is the way. Like the 50 years it took to defeat the Soviet Union. That's what's happening but a smart lad like you would already know that.
1-The UAE and Jordan are and have always been allies in the region. Bigger fish to fry elsewhere but we keep chipping away.
2-Cuba is Uncle Sam's neck of the woods an ally of ours. That'll take care of itself shortly.
3-Saudi and Qatar have had the world by the plums for decades with oil. The long term view was they were handy allies. As you'll know both have problems with Wahhabi extremists helping fund and destabilize the middle east. MBS is dealing with this(locking sympathetic donors up in hotels etc) alongside a modernisation program. They are also very handy regards intelligence and dealing with ISIS recently. Which is why they're being cut some slack. Also being deadly enemies of the Shia works for us. Again one for the long haul.
4-China, North Korea and Vietnam. You really need me for that? You'd have to be pretty stupid to not understand why we wouldn't go to war unless as a last resort. The pressure for human rights, getting them involved in world monetary systems and building a coalition of democracies against them is the way. Like the 50 years it took to defeat the Soviet Union. That's what's happening but a smart lad like you would already know that.
In reply to Post #754
There you go again with your anti British gangster portrayal again. It's a British overseas territory ffs. What's your problem? Read and learn, empty vessels and all that...
There you go again with your anti British gangster portrayal again. It's a British overseas territory ffs. What's your problem? Read and learn, empty vessels and all that...
In reply to Post #756
What gangster portrayal? Honestly what you've got is a problem with me saying Britain has gone to war and people have died for little to no cause and based on little to false evidence. It's not an entire country it's the leaders that made those choices...as you clearly stated in an earlier post. It's quite clear you're extremely patriotic and take any negative comments about British conduct as a personal attack on you and your country and in turn it to some extreme misinterpretation, I.e. ‘anti British gangster portrayal' when all I merely stated was that democracy that has been installed in the Middle East (and other places) isn't actually that democratic due to the people that have been in power. And that it's a reason terrorist attacks occur in this country. Both facts.
It's a British territory so they went to get it back. Plain and simple. Not for democractic reasons. To reclaim what was taken.
I know all the reasons behind why Britain hasn't gone to install democracy in those countries. But it proves my point that you are saying it is Britain's place in the world to install democracy where there isn't democracy. Yet you clearly know it's not that simple is it and it's about doing it where suits them best, mainly for financial or positional reasons. Because if you truly had the simplistic view that ‘Britain is great and we must spread democracy to places that haven't got it' then there would be nothing stopping them spreading it everywhere.
Again, why do you feel that Britain is the worlds police and saviour? Is it your patriotism or is there another reason behind it? It's a genuine question, one which you eluded already a number of times.
What gangster portrayal?
Honestly what you've got is a problem with me saying Britain has gone to war and people have died for little to no cause and based on little to false evidence. It's not an entire country it's the leaders that made those choices...as you clearly stated in an earlier post. It's quite clear you're extremely patriotic and take any negative comments about British conduct as a personal attack on you and your country and in turn it to some extreme misinterpretation, I.e. ‘anti British gangster portrayal' when all I merely stated was that democracy that has been installed in the Middle East (and other places) isn't actually that democratic due to the people that have been in power. And that it's a reason terrorist attacks occur in this country. Both facts. It's a British territory so they went to get it back. Plain and simple. Not for democractic reasons. To reclaim what was taken.
I know all the reasons behind why Britain hasn't gone to install democracy in those countries. But it proves my point that you are saying it is Britain's place in the world to install democracy where there isn't democracy. Yet you clearly know it's not that simple is it and it's about doing it where suits them best, mainly for financial or positional reasons. Because if you truly had the simplistic view that ‘Britain is great and we must spread democracy to places that haven't got it' then there would be nothing stopping them spreading it everywhere.
Again, why do you feel that Britain is the worlds police and saviour? Is it your patriotism or is there another reason behind it? It's a genuine question, one which you eluded already a number of times.
Took the knee today........Didnt want to but............
was much easier to steady my rifle whilst shooting a rabbit at 150yrds..........
was much easier to steady my rifle whilst shooting a rabbit at 150yrds..........
In reply to Post #757
You two still at it, has it got to the point where neither of you want to back down and both want the last word ?
You two still at it, has it got to the point where neither of you want to back down and both want the last word ?
In reply to Post #759
He's ok at heart , a bit conflicted for some reason, just wants teachers to teach the negative side of British history as that's all there is ...
He's ok at heart , a bit conflicted for some reason, just wants teachers to teach the negative side of British history as that's all there is ...
In reply to Post #760
'er don't get me involved
'er don't get me involved
In reply to Post #761
In reply to Post #647
"Unpopular statement coming, I might need your tinhat blankalot!
Libyan national kills 3 in reading...UK forces murder thousands of innocent civilians in Libya 2011 by firing missiles"
It was the MURDER part that the clueless snake has since edited that needed putting straight. Brought you into then
In reply to Post #647
"Unpopular statement coming, I might need your tinhat blankalot!
Libyan national kills 3 in reading...UK forces murder thousands of innocent civilians in Libya 2011 by firing missiles"
It was the MURDER part that the clueless snake has since edited that needed putting straight. Brought you into then
In reply to Post #760
Never said that's all there is, but it's just as important as the positive stuff. Otherwise you get a skewed view of history and unbalanced opinions of things.
The Germans teach their kids about nazi Germany, yet we don't teach our children about the British empire
Never said that's all there is, but it's just as important as the positive stuff. Otherwise you get a skewed view of history and unbalanced opinions of things.
The Germans teach their kids about nazi Germany, yet we don't teach our children about the British empire
In reply to Post #762
I've never edited that post
You're right though. Both murder.
I've never edited that post
You're right though. Both murder.
In reply to Post #764
Look at my post above it snake
Look at my post above it snake