OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Geoff Parkstone]

Wow, a peaceable and conciliatory post, Swale. Well thought out and expressed.

Whilst I do not doubt that the EU has been instrumental in aiding peace in western europe since 1945, I suspect they are but a bit player in that process. They could/did not prevent civil wars as Yugoslavia broke up, nor the in fighting that led to Czech and Slovak separation in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I'm not saying that they could have stopped that - those current member states weren't in the EU then, but the point is that the fighting still went on in Europe, just not in the western european arena.

Equally the global conflicts now have moved to the Middle east, rather than western europe because of oil needs, oops, no I mean naughty Muslims kicking off against each other and not us/european meddling. Western Europe is no longer a global battlefield because it has ceased to be as important as it was 75 years ago. There's oil out there to fight about, not the Alsace Lorraine issue or Polish sovereignty.

The EU have hardly presented a united front when europe does become embroiled in conflict elsewhere. Where was the Italian navy during the Falklands conflict, where were all the other european nations in the various Syrian/Iraqi/Iranian/Kuwait conflicts of the past 35 years? Sure they have made sure that no warfare is conducted in their own back yards, avoided belgium being flattened again etc, but they have been far from unified when it comes to conflict elsewhere: they have just taken their own views, rather than a community one.

Yet they want one army etc? Given the collective inability to agree on a collective view as to conflict response outside their back yard, I doubt that army would ever be called to arms, or could even end up fighting itself if the French want (a) and the Germans (b)!

So, a force for peace, or a force for NIMBY?

[ramAnag]

"So many ifs, assumptions and coincidences GP...."

Sometimes there are so many coincidences that they cease to be coincidences but rather realities. Can you really claim that oppression of, discrimination against and at the extreme, elimination of minorities are not a recurring feature of "superpowers/superstates"?

The three I mentioned are current - but the Romans weren't averse to wiping out opposition, particularly at a religious level etc, eg Christianity; the British Empire was hardly a tolerant one, particularly in East Africa.

You can hide behind your belief that these are all coincidences if you will, but I'm not fooled. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, as Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton would say:

...........coincidentally, Acton is very close to / historically part of Brentford, where we are playing on Saturday. Maybe you are right after all

That’s not what I’m trying to claim at all, Parky...and of course you have a point about the way ‘superpowers/states/empires’ have behaved in the past, but when was the last time the EU behaved in that way or has shown any inclination to?

Typical Leavers seem more concerned about them ‘bullying’ us about the shape of bananas than ‘wiping out opposition’ and if there are to be a collection of six or more such ‘superpowers’ in the future I fancy our chances more being part of one with our geographical neighbours than going it alone as Little - ever more divided - Britain.

Citing the EU’s failure to get involved in the Falklands War appears to me a particularly poor example. I’d have been seriously concerned if the EU had ever got involved in Thatcher’s war of convenience and expediency.

Interesting how quiet we were, and largely remain, in comparison over Hongkong...but then we’re not quite so tough when the ‘big boys’ come knocking are we?

[Trickytreesreds]

That’s not what I’m trying to claim at all, Parky...and of course you have a point about the way ‘superpowers/states/empires’ have behaved in the past, but when was the last time the EU behaved in that way or has shown any inclination to?

Typical Leavers seem more concerned about them ‘bullying’ us about the shape of bananas than ‘wiping out opposition’ and if there are to be a collection of six or more such ‘superpowers’ in the future I fancy our chances more being part of one with our geographical neighbours than going it alone as Little - ever more divided - Britain.

Citing the EU’s failure to get involved in the Falklands War appears to me a particularly poor example. I’d have been seriously concerned if the EU had ever got involved in Thatcher’s war of convenience and expediency.

Interesting how quiet we were, and largely remain, in comparison over Hongkong...but then we’re not quite so tough when the ‘big boys’ come knocking are we?

Sorry RA, but in large, that is all but bollox.

Thatchers war as you call it. Exactly who invaded who? Exactly who's sovereign (there's that word again) territory was violated?
Parko missed the bit out, where the EU didn't help? Didn't exactly stop the French helping the opposition did it? Until the yanks threatened them.

As for Hong Kong, who did it belong to?
We had it under lease, that was all. We have/had no rights on the way that region is run, since that lease expired.
Even if it hadn't, so do you believe your European mates would help?
I don't.

[ramAnag]

Sorry RA, but in large, that is all but bollox.

Thatchers war as you call it. Exactly who invaded who? Exactly who's sovereign (there's that word again) territory was violated?
Parko missed the bit out, where the EU didn't help? Didn't exactly stop the French helping the opposition did it? Until the yanks threatened them.

As for Hong Kong, who did it belong to?
We had it under lease, that was all. We have/had no rights on the way that region is run, since that lease expired.
Even if it hadn't, so do you believe your European mates would help?
I don't.

C’mon Tricky...virtually everyone accepts that the Falklands War was manufactured to bolster the popularity of a fading and increasingly out of favour PM.
It was populism at work again...’Britain rules the waves, never shall be slaves’ and all that bollux.
It was the Tories, and Thatcher in particular, manufacturing a situation to court popularity just as Brexit appeals to the populist Little Britain mentality, only in 1982 all too many of our unfortunate servicemen paid with their lives or life changing injuries at least.

You’re right of course in that Argentina acted badly and were not blameless but the whole thing was avoidable except that a ‘nice’ convenient little war against an infinitely weaker ‘enemy’ suited the Tory cause at the time and yes, I know, the Hong Kong situation is different but the comparative lack of sabre rattling and the rapidity with which we left once big old China demanded it was in very marked contrast to how we ‘stood up’ to those pesky little Argies.

Anyway, unbelievably it’s thirty seven years ago now, let’s move on.

[AdiSalisbury]

Didn't exactly stop the French helping the opposition did it?

EU solidarity at its finest

[Geoff Parkstone]

C’mon Tricky...virtually everyone accepts that the Falklands War was manufactured to bolster the popularity of a fading and increasingly out of favour PM.
It was populism at work again...’Britain rules the waves, never shall be slaves’ and all that bollux.
It was the Tories, and Thatcher in particular, manufacturing a situation to court popularity just as Brexit appeals to the populist Little Britain mentality, only in 1982 all too many of our unfortunate servicemen paid with their lives or life changing injuries at least.

You’re right of course in that Argentina acted badly and were not blameless but the whole thing was avoidable except that a ‘nice’ convenient little war against an infinitely weaker ‘enemy’ suited the Tory cause at the time and yes, I know, the Hong Kong situation is different but the comparative lack of sabre rattling and the rapidity with which we left once big old China demanded it was in very marked contrast to how we ‘stood up’ to those pesky little Argies.

Anyway, unbelievably it’s thirty seven years ago now, let’s move on.

You do have a wierd recollection of history rA.

China was leased, they wanted it back, didn't offer a lease extension, we gave it back

Falklands were and are crown territory and invaded by another sovereign state

To put it simply, with an analogy. If you owned a house and squatters broke in and started sleeping in your bed, you'd take action to remove them. If you leased your house and your landlord did not renew your lease, you would move out and hand back the keys.

[Trickytreesreds]

C’mon Tricky...virtually everyone accepts that the Falklands War was manufactured to bolster the popularity of a fading and increasingly out of favour PM.
It was populism at work again...’Britain rules the waves, never shall be slaves’ and all that bollux.
It was the Tories, and Thatcher in particular, manufacturing a situation to court popularity just as Brexit appeals to the populist Little Britain mentality, only in 1982 all too many of our unfortunate servicemen paid with their lives or life changing injuries at least.

You’re right of course in that Argentina acted badly and were not blameless but the whole thing was avoidable except that a ‘nice’ convenient little war against an infinitely weaker ‘enemy’ suited the Tory cause at the time and yes, I know, the Hong Kong situation is different but the comparative lack of sabre rattling and the rapidity with which we left once big old China demanded it was in very marked contrast to how we ‘stood up’ to those pesky little Argies.

Anyway, unbelievably it’s thirty seven years ago now, let’s move on.

I never said Thatcher didn't milk it for all it's worth.
However, what choice did she have? Act or do a Corbyn. Abandon British citizens and send a strong letter. Even the UN told them to withdraw. They didn't. Only option was boot them out.
The Junta did the very thing you are accusing Thatcher of actually.
America helped as much as it could. The EU did feck all, as usual.

I think my recollection of it, is more accurate than yours.

[ramAnag]

You do have a wierd recollection of history rA.

China was leased, they wanted it back, didn't offer a lease extension, we gave it back

Falklands were and are crown territory and invaded by another sovereign state

To put it simply, with an analogy. If you owned a house and squatters broke in and started sleeping in your bed, you'd take action to remove them. If you leased your house and your landlord did not renew your lease, you would move out and hand back the keys.

Take your point and accept your informed view of history, Parky.
Suspect it may have been a little more complex than you suggest though.
Did the negotiations for returning Hong Kong not begin in 1982, a year after the Falklands War, and take a further fifteen years until the situation was resolved?
Slightly different mindset from the one regarding the Falklands for, admittedly, largely the reasons you suggest.

Think it was Hong Kong, not China, that was leased.

[ramAnag]

‘I never said Thatcher didn’t milk it for all it was worth’.

At last! We agree, Tricky. I rest my case although I’ve no idea why you’ve introduced Corbyn into the argument.

[Trickytreesreds]

‘I never said Thatcher didn’t milk it for all it was worth’.

At last! We agree, Tricky. I rest my case although I’ve no idea why you’ve introduced Corbyn into the argument.

Weird, just weird

[ramAnag]

Weird, just weird

In what way?
You’ve conceded that Thatcher ‘milked’ the Falklands scenario for ‘all it was worth’ which was my point when I talked of it being a contrived and manufactured war and I don’t know why, yet again, you’ve introduced Corbyn into the conversation.
What’s ‘weird’ about that...apart from the fact that, for once, you and I agree?

[MadAmster]

GP...you know better than that. To say that the Labour Party is ‘ultimately anti Semitic’ is ridiculous. There may well be anti semites within the Labour Party and there are almost certainly members of the Labour Party who are opposed to the Israeli stance on Palestine, but to describe the Labour Party as ‘ultimately anti Semitic’ makes about as much sense as describing all football supporters as hooligans.

Changing tack a little here BUT.......

IMHO, anyone who is opposed to the Israeli stance is not automatically anti semitic. Not all Jews are Israeli, not all Israelis are Jews. People opposed to the atrocities Israel carries out are anti the political stance of a country NOT against Jews in general or against those who speak one of the Semite languages (some Arabs also spoke/speak a Semite language).

The Isreali stance and related actions on Palestine have been condemned by more than 75 UN Resolutions. Does that make the UN anti semitic? No it doesn't.

I don't doubt that there are some anti semites in the Labour party. I have the same feelings with reagrd to the Tories, Lib Dems and any other party. A handful doesn't make something endemic.

[Trickytreesreds]

In what way?
You’ve conceded that Thatcher ‘milked’ the Falklands scenario for ‘all it was worth’ which was my point when I talked of it being a contrived and manufactured war and I don’t know why, yet again, you’ve introduced Corbyn into the conversation.
What’s ‘weird’ about that...apart from the fact that, for once, you and I agree?

you have the most selective memory and way of reading things, I have ever witnessed. You gloryfy my comment, that Thatcher "milked it" like a moral victory to your views. You have all the hallmarks of a narcissist.

1.When I say milked it. She basked in the adulation of doing what a leader of the UK should do. Protect British citizens and sovereign territory. When we won the world cup, what would you call the aftermath?

2. Contrived? Are you on drugs? The Falklands were "invaded" by an aggressive power. What part of that, does your education mindset not understand?

3. I introduced Corbyn, because you and him are of the same tunnel mindset. He has said many times, we should abandon the Falklands. Leave British citizens to their fate. In 1982, he would have done **** all and you know it.
In power today, Corbyn would strip the forces to the bones and align us with Cuba as an axis against capitalism.

4. You ignore every part of posts you don't want to read, or accept. The EU do nothing, to help anyone when it isn't in the Empires interest. They failed to help a mamber state. They even helped an enemy against us.

5. Servicemen sign up, to protect the state and it's sovereign territories. Don't like that? Don't join. It isn't compulsory.

Weird completely covers your analysis of things. QED.

[ramAnag]

you have the most selective memory and way of reading things, I have ever witnessed. You gloryfy my comment, that Thatcher "milked it" like a moral victory to your views. You have all the hallmarks of a narcissist.

1.When I say milked it. She basked in the adulation of doing what a leader of the UK should do. Protect British citizens and sovereign territory. When we won the world cup, what would you call the aftermath?

2. Contrived? Are you on drugs? The Falklands were "invaded" by an aggressive power. What part of that, does your education mindset not understand?

3. I introduced Corbyn, because you and him are of the same tunnel mindset. He has said many times, we should abandon the Falklands. Leave British citizens to their fate. In 1982, he would have done **** all and you know it.
In power today, Corbyn would strip the forces to the bones and align us with Cuba as an axis against capitalism.

4. You ignore every part of posts you don't want to read, or accept. The EU do nothing, to help anyone when it isn't in the Empires interest. They failed to help a mamber state. They even helped an enemy against us.

5. Servicemen sign up, to protect the state and it's sovereign territories. Don't like that? Don't join. It isn't compulsory.

Weird completely covers your analysis of things. QED.

Narcissist! Lol!!

1. Your definition of ‘milked it’ equals ‘basked in the adulation’ apparently. Mine equals ‘exploited’. Either way...she was very unpopular pre the Falklands and as you agree...’basked in the adulation’ afterwards. Not much difference.

2. Keep your hair on Tricky...’I’ve never denied that the Falklands were ‘invaded’ but given all the circumstances...was the reaction from the Government and PM of the time the only way to go about things? In my opinion the whole reaction was politically orchestrated and young lives, both British and Argentinian, were lost unnecessarily.

3. I am not of the same mindset as Corbyn in any way. I don’t approve of his leadership and I believe it’s a tragedy that his inadequacies as leader of the opposition are partly responsible for the mess we are in today.
I’m not aware of him having any intent to ‘abandon’ the Falkland Islanders although he has spoken of the need for talks to resolve an issue which continues to be something of an ‘open sore’ between the two countries. Given the geographical location of the Falklands that seems quite reasonable to me.
As far as ‘stripping the forces to the bones’ is concerned...that possibly has already happened and the ‘Cuba/axis against capitalism’ point is just not worth a response.

4. Clearly I don’t ‘ignore every part of posts I don’t accept’ or I wouldn’t be replying to you would I...and how exactly did the EU ‘help the enemy’ against us?

5. What a strange comment from you of all people.
Obviously those who ‘join up’ are making a conscious decision which will involve, depending on circumstances and situation, putting their lives in danger. To that extent I agree with you.
Beyond that, if you think that governments then abandon all responsibility for actions which put the lives of our troops in danger for, in this case, very dubious reasons then I fundamentally disagree with you.

[AngryRam]

Narcissist! Lol!!

1. Your definition of ‘milked it’ equals ‘basked in the adulation’ apparently. Mine equals ‘exploited’. Either way...she was very unpopular pre the Falklands and as you agree...’basked in the adulation’ afterwards. Not much difference.

2. Keep your hair on Tricky...’I’ve never denied that the Falklands were ‘invaded’ but given all the circumstances...was the reaction from the Government and PM of the time the only way to go about things? In my opinion the whole reaction was politically orchestrated and young lives, both British and Argentinian, were lost unnecessarily.

3. I am not of the same mindset as Corbyn in any way. I don’t approve of his leadership and I believe it’s a tragedy that his inadequacies as leader of the opposition are partly responsible for the mess we are in today.
I’m not aware of him having any intent to ‘abandon’ the Falkland Islanders although he has spoken of the need for talks to resolve an issue which continues to be something of an ‘open sore’ between the two countries. Given the geographical location of the Falklands that seems quite reasonable to me.
As far as ‘stripping the forces to the bones’ is concerned...that possibly has already happened and the ‘Cuba/axis against capitalism’ point is just not worth a response.

4. Clearly I don’t ‘ignore every part of posts I don’t accept’ or I wouldn’t be replying to you would I...and how exactly did the EU ‘help the enemy’ against us?

5. What a strange comment from you of all people.
Obviously those who ‘join up’ are making a conscious decision which will involve, depending on circumstances and situation, putting their lives in danger. To that extent I agree with you.
Beyond that, if you think that governments then abandon all responsibility for actions which put the lives of our troops in danger for, in this case, very dubious reasons then I fundamentally disagree with you.

Nope, I think ‘weird just weird’ just about covered it..
You live in a strange place rA..