Pet Shop Boys Community

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/45966


StevePSB

Undertaker wrote:

Palpatine wrote: 1) American help was an integral part of Britain's victory over Argentina.

2) Mrs. Thatcher was making deep cuts to the Royal Navy when Argentina invaded. The two British carriers that formed the core of the Task Force, HMS Hermes and HMS Invincible, were being sold to India and Australia, respectively, and the two amphibious assault ships that landed soldiers and Royal Marines on the islands were scheduled to be scrapped in 1983. If Galtieri had waited six months to invade the Falklands Maggie wouldn't have had the tools to retake them because of her own cuts to the Navy. Saved by the bell, indeed!

Since 1945, (formerly) Great Britain has been the junior partner to the United States, mini-me to Uncle Sam's Dr. Evil, and doesn't do anything as far as foreign policy is concerned without American approval, tacit or otherwise. The best illustration is the Anglo-French invasion of Egypt in 1956. Anthony Eden withdrew British forces from Suez because Eisenhower told him to.

LOL take note of Redsock.

What's America do? Supply the hotdogs?

British forces knew the positions and dispositions of the Argentine fleet in the early stages of the war because of American satellite reconnaissance. The US provided invaluable intelligence to British forces during the war. Reagan even offered to lend the British a small aircraft carrier if one of yours got sunk. The US also rushed delivery of the then new AIM-9L Sidewinder to the task force. The older AIM-9D that the Argentinians were using required the pilot to get behind an aircraft before shooting it down. The AIM-9L had an all-aspect seeker, meaning it could lock on to the heat signature of a target from any direction, even head-on, conferring a huge advantage on the British pilots.

Oh, and BTW, I'm not American so I'm not going Colonel Ridge and doing the whole jingoism act. I'm only interested in the truth. It saddens me how successive governments since at least Harold Wilson have gutted the British military, especially the Navy, so that it is overly reliant on the US.

Palpatine wrote:

redsock wrote:

Palpatine wrote:If Argentina invaded the Falklands now the UK wouldn't be able to retake them. The UK has one aircraft carrier and no airplanes to put on them.

Sorry, but they'd never be actually able to take them now. Check what the UK actually has stationed around the islands before sprouting such nonsense.

This being just one ship that makes the entire ageing Argentinian air force redundant ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer

The Argentine Air Force is redundant because the country is broke and nobody will sell them modern equipment. They're still equipped with the same aircraft as they were thirty years ago. One destroyer wouldn't stand a chance against a handful of modern aircraft equipped with modern anti-ship missiles.....

1 ... which they don't have, ergo they have nothing to go up against it.

2 The US navy had a rather embarrassing problem with the TYPE 45 destroyer in so far as they asked it to switch off PAAMS (Primary Anti Air Missile System) because it was "constraining the training" in exercises ... so yes, it could probably have a good go against modern aircraft ....

Hopefully, it should never come to finding out, the Argentinians lost all rights to enter into negotiations over the Falkland Islands when the invaded. End of story really.

And anyway Palp, we best not hijack this thread of Maggies !

Yeah, apologies for the digression.

raggatwin wrote:Loss of heavy industry
Endorsement of apartheid
Selling off of council housing
Liberalisation of money markets
Selling off of national industries
De- regulation
Smashing of working class communities
Greed is good/im alright jack
Introduction of free market principles into public services
Stole my afternoon milk
Clause 28
Friend of various fascist dictatorships, not least pinochet.

You are an unabashed commie. She saved the UK from the brink of death. National undustries all went belly-up because of socialism which is selfish in its very nature. You want to get your greedy hands on people's money? Raise taxes, create superfluous bureacracies and then hire your brother, sister, uncle, aunt, cousin and nephew. This happened in the UK and it's been happening in Greece, Venezuela and all the other rotten socialist states. You wanna find a greedy, selfish person? Go look among socialists. If you wanna know what socialism is all about, you only need to look at what the socialist liars project onto capitalism. Oh, by the way. Fascism was invented by socialist scum, too. Sorry if Pinochet wiped the floor with you socialists and saved Chile from economic destruction. Wherever socialism reigns, destruction follows. The EU is collapsing because of socialism. The economic crisis in the US was caused by Clinton and Carter who forced banks to give loans to people who could not afford them. It had nothing to do with capitalism. It was failed socialism. And yet here you are going on with your tired old 101 socialist stereotypes about evil capitalism. Thatcher did what was necessary to rescue Europe's sick man. The UK recovered in the 80s thanks to her. Without her, you would have had another Greece thirty years earlier. Socialism was unsustainable as it breeds laziness and selfishness and it promises freebies from other people's money.. And this is not about greed and selfishness? Socialists in state-run companies never cared that the companies were unsustainable and that the tax payers were being fleeced at their expense. They wanted to keep their overpaid jobs and ridiculously high pension plans. This happened in Greece and look where it got us. You, mate, are the epitome of selfishness and hatred. You are gloating about the death of a demented and old lady and yet you socialists always pretend to be compassionate and tolerant. I guess this is another lie.

Undertaker wrote:As much as she f***** the country up for the working class, she had more balls than any other politician of the past 50 years.

Britania ruled the waves with her at the helm. Every leader was shit scared of her and she certainly wouldn't stand back and let the scroungers , beit British or immigrant, dominate like they are.

No, that's what socialism does. It kills any incentive to gin something up. Instead, it rewards laziness and selfishness. I guess in a socialist's world there are no rags-to-riches stories when in fact it's in socialism where rags-to-riches are rare.

raggatwin wrote:One good thing about owen jones article is that he reminds us that thatcherism, conservatism and neo conservatism are ideologies. Advocates of these positions usually suggest that people are naturally conservative or naturally right wing and that their ideas are part of the natural order, this is complete rubbish, Thatcher was as ideologically driven as those 'communists' she supposedly defeated.

Yet another projection: Socialism and communism are totalitarian ideologies that failed every time they were tried. And yet you hold on to your heathen religion. In your world, there are no rags-to-riches stories, right? Only people who were born rich. You are such a douche.

Greetings,

alig wrote:Yet another projection: Socialism and communism are totalitarian ideologies that failed every time they were tried.

Yes, that is indeed a projection on your part.

Socialism and communism are economic theories... totalitarianism is a political ideology.

Retro.

I am from a coal mining family. My dad and my uncles all lost their jobs in their mid-40s. They mostly never worked again. What good jobs are there for the demonised working-class these days? Now 1700 people apply for minimum wage jobs in Costa Coffee a mile from where a coal mine stood until the 1980s.

Dipso wrote:I am from a coal mining family. My dad and my uncles all lost their jobs in their mid-40s. They mostly never worked again. What good jobs are there for the demonised working-class these days? Now 1700 people apply for minimum wage jobs in Costa Coffee a mile from where a coal mine stood until the 1980s.

She was such a f*cking idiot that her father's business would now be a Tesco's.

@ AliG

I am a socialist yes.

I am a douche? Well, in a purely unscientific observation it seems that you are on the wrong side of opinion here.

As for glorying in the death of an old woman......how many old women died of a broken heart due to her polices? How many old women died becaise they could not afford to heat the houses they live in becuase of thatxhers obsession with introducing a market into a natural monopoly?

Twerp.

I dont think you know what selfish means either......

Wow, Alig... that's some twisted view you have about humanity.

alig wrote:

Undertaker wrote:As much as she f***** the country up for the working class, she had more balls than any other politician of the past 50 years.

Britania ruled the waves with her at the helm. Every leader was shit scared of her and she certainly wouldn't stand back and let the scroungers , beit British or immigrant, dominate like they are.

No, that's what socialism does. It kills any incentive to gin something up. Instead, it rewards laziness and selfishness. I guess in a socialist's world there are no rags-to-riches stories when in fact it's in socialism where rags-to-riches are rare.

Rags to riches narratives that 'prove' the openess and fairness of the system. Alan sugar made it, why can't you? Much of the serious wealth in this country is inherited not worked for.....

Did I mention the housing shortage she created through selling off puvlic property? She helped engineer the prpperty fetishism that is so prevalent today.....