Actually, Japan Started World War 2 by invading mainland Asia, that whole thing with Germany came afterward- and that whole Pear Harbor thing came many years afterward. Japan killed over 30 million people, far more than Germany, so someone would still have had to stop them.FurKlarheitIchRant said:
A question for non British people
- Thread starter jigilojoe
- Start date
Recommended Videos
listen all i'm asking for is not independence its just a little bit of respect and a lack of sheep jokes. i mean if the UK split up Wales Scotland and Irland would insignificant backwaters and England would only be marginally better.Para199x said:
and i dislike the nationalist bit, i'm a socialist and personally think the best solution would be if the EU became one singular coherent body.
ah Thatcher. the destroyer of the proletariat and all things good in this world. the only people whom i know like her and will mourn her death are, British Nazis (they exist right? If America has its own Nazi party then Briton is sure to have their own too) and people who hate the Irish.
I first heard about Thatcher when I was reading some old issues of Hellblazer a few years back, or at least that's the 1st time her name registered in my mind. I came upon her name several times since then and it's always in the context of how bitchy she was, but I never heard just what exactly did she do to earn that reputation (nor did I care enough to look it up.)
Sorry but can we have a source on that as the main problem with invasion of the falklands for the uk was that we did not have any navy ships anywhere near the islands after the HMS Endurance was withdrawn from the area.This is why it took up to nearly a week for us to get any proper support to the island and let the Argentine army fortify there postions.Blitzwarp said:
Hate the tories but part of being a leader is making tough decisions that people will hate you for, Don't get me wrong I hate her as much as any British person, but she was a strong leader in a country full of problems and I hate to think of what we'd be like now if a weak leader was in charge. Bit of a tough one really yeah I totally hate her for what she did to almost every family around where I live by closing the mines and BL but in a way what she did was neccessary and if she didn't do it somebody else would have.
Like I said sometimes being a leader means being hated for something you had to do.
Like I said sometimes being a leader means being hated for something you had to do.
yes but mainland Europe would not be involved and it would be a skirmish between the British colonial forces and Japan, the British not being split on two fronts would almost certainly win. my point is not that war is wrong merely that the second "world war" could have been avoided.RelexCryo said:
She was against the Socialism of Britain. To end this Socialism, she closed down entire industries; leaving tens of thousands of people out of their jobs and relying on state benefits to live. Good job Maggie.Dimitriov said:
Hi, I'm Irish 
Guess what I think of Maggy??
I'd like to point out that I'm not a lunatic Irish Republican, but being a citizen of the Irish Republic, and a student of history, I can't say I appreciate what the woman did for furthering of peace in the conflict ridden Northern Ireland of her day. Her reputation as the Iron Lady is well deserved, but as you said, was that actually of benefit to Britain at the time?
Her legacy will be debated in time, I'm sure, by excellent British historians -I'm being sincere here, the majority of my favourite historians are probably British!- but I think her passing will not be marked with fond farewells from the Welsh mining towns, or indeed from the Nationalist community in Northern Ireland.
Being someone from the Republic, and being a student of Irish diplomatic history, I know that her personality was not initially conducive to cooperation. Then again, our own now reviled former leader Charles J. Haughey (a true Machiavell) wasn't exactly cooperative with the British government either.
I'm kind of puzzled by Meryl Streep playing her- surely Lindsay Duncan's performance was the final word on her? Incredible performance.
Anyway, I know that as disliked as she may be in Ireland, I know she's utterly reviled by a large percentage of the British people.
Guess what I think of Maggy??
I'd like to point out that I'm not a lunatic Irish Republican, but being a citizen of the Irish Republic, and a student of history, I can't say I appreciate what the woman did for furthering of peace in the conflict ridden Northern Ireland of her day. Her reputation as the Iron Lady is well deserved, but as you said, was that actually of benefit to Britain at the time?
Her legacy will be debated in time, I'm sure, by excellent British historians -I'm being sincere here, the majority of my favourite historians are probably British!- but I think her passing will not be marked with fond farewells from the Welsh mining towns, or indeed from the Nationalist community in Northern Ireland.
Being someone from the Republic, and being a student of Irish diplomatic history, I know that her personality was not initially conducive to cooperation. Then again, our own now reviled former leader Charles J. Haughey (a true Machiavell) wasn't exactly cooperative with the British government either.
I'm kind of puzzled by Meryl Streep playing her- surely Lindsay Duncan's performance was the final word on her? Incredible performance.
Anyway, I know that as disliked as she may be in Ireland, I know she's utterly reviled by a large percentage of the British people.
and it may sound nationalistic and over confident but you must remember Britain at the time controlled one third of the population of the world and had the largest and most sophisticated navy's in the world, this is all not including the rate of growth the British empire had been gowning throw before the first world war.FurKlarheitIchRant said:
My opinion is pretty much this. She did something most politicians don't have the balls to do. Make decision that will benefit an economy in the long term at the cost at negative outcomes in the short time. Most just make some short term gain in order to seem popular and help them and their party stay in power and this just doesn't work overall.Therumancer said:
She dealt with industries that were failing and if carried on would have collapsed not just in the industry itself but probably economically for the whole nation. Though obviously we have no way of knowing what would've exactly happened if she left them alone. But it doesn't stop the fact those industries weren't doing well. Unfortunately the move did case high unemployment and the North being crippled for a period of time and her anti-union ideals didn't really help much on the popularity side. But it did help with a strong economy we saw in the 90's. But like Therumancer said this happened after her time so you wouldn't associate it with her straight away. The economy of the time is perceived to be caused by who is in power at the time and not what happened before and other factors you would need to consider. Look at Gordon Brown, he came into power at the worst possible time and suffered for it. So in the public eye, during her terms things seemed bad, so in association what she did seemed bad. Well in some aspects yes, it was bad (especially in the north) but in the long run very positive for our economy.
That being said, her last term is just a big grey area and many questionable decision were made.
Really we need more politicians like her, maybe not to her extremes. But those who are willing to make changes that will help in the long term. Even if it makes you unpopular, and not just have policies that can help you stay in power which is what we are seeing now.
Ironically we need more manufacturing industries if we want to compete in the global market these days. But hey that's economics and politics for you. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
