Thatcher in hospital

super_furry

Is she dead yet?

round tower huntsman

good riddance.

kraggy

kraggy wrote: »

Dudess, in fairness, she's a proven murderer, guilty of war crimes.

And I'm not talking about any Irish political stuff.

I personally hopes she dies a painful, agonising death. I really do. She heaped misery on many. Now it's her turn.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What war crimes and who did she murder?

In the Falklands War, she personally ordered the sinking of the Argentinian Naval Vesel, the Belgrano. It was a huge story. The British Navy had no right to attack the ship. It was not located where the British Government claimed at the time. In all, 323 Argentinian sailors perished.

The vessel was:

a. outside the exclusion zone
b. was sailing AWAY from the British vessel that torpedoed it.


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

The controversy lead to probably the only time where Margaret Thatcher was beaten in a public debate in such a convincing manner:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWOy23MLY1I

strobe

Nodin wrote: »

Funny enough, there is one good thing that could be said about Thatcher, but nobody seems to have brought it up.....

Demon in the sack?

Fratton Fred

kraggy wrote: »

In the Falklands War, she personally ordered the sinking of the Argentinian Naval Vesel, the Belgrano. It was a huge story. The British Navy had no right to attack the ship. It was not located where the British Government claimed at the time. In all, 323 Argentinian sailors perished.

The vessel was:

a. outside the exclusion zone
b. was sailing AWAY from the British vessel that torpedoed it.

I remember it well. I was on the sea front in Old Portsmouth when the task force went and when the bulk of it came back. Funnily enough, it went because of an act of war by the Argentines.

a. The exclusion zone around the Falklands was an advisory zone to Merchant shipping that if found in that area, they may be boarded and searched. the exclusion zone was irrelevant to the Argentine navy, they were the aggressor and therefore could be engaged whenever and wherever they are found, inside or outside the exclusion zone.

b. Big ****ing deal. it was a war, not a game of "It". a naval warship can't suddenly declare "Tacks" because it is sailing away from where the action is. The Belgrano was sent out as one half of a pincer movement to force the RN task force away from the Flaklands, it was an active participant in a war. It is a shame about the 323 sailors, but that is what happens when you go around starting wars.

You should read the article you linked to, it makes it all very clear.

efb

How many wars have Britain managed to win on their own?

KeithAFC

foxinsox wrote: »

Sometimes the comments made on here are just sick...

The woman was a politician and did what she thought was best at the time I would imagine.

She is now an 85 year old sick woman...

Some of you on here have wished and agonising death on her, hope that she dies screaming for a priest...

How many of you were even born when she was in power?

Ye care more about a kangaroo than an old woman dying!!!!

Sometimes I despair at the comments made here

Why would any of you wish such agony on an old person....

She made plenty of people do that.

kraggy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I remember it well. I was on the sea front in Old Portsmouth when the task force went and when the bulk of it came back. Funnily enough, it went because of an act of war by the Argentines.

a. The exclusion zone around the Falklands was an advisory zone to Merchant shipping that if found in that area, they may be boarded and searched. the exclusion zone was irrelevant to the Argentine navy, they were the aggressor and therefore could be engaged whenever and wherever they are found, inside or outside the exclusion zone.

b. Big ****ing deal. it was a war, not a game of "It". a naval warship can't suddenly declare "Tacks" because it is sailing away from where the action is. The Belgrano was sent out as one half of a pincer movement to force the RN task force away from the Flaklands, it was an active participant in a war. It is a shame about the 323 sailors, but that is what happens when you go around starting wars.

You should read the article you linked to, it makes it all very clear.

I have to head to bed now, but I'll get back to you tomorrow.

In the meantime, I'll leave you with this

War Crime: "...any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity"

The Argentinian ship was sailing away.

ascanbe

Hilarious to see some of the posts celebrating her economic achievments and fight against 'state intervention' in business because she 'broke the coal-miners unions' etc.
The coal-miners union had brought down the previous Tory government in 1974; that's why Thatcher was so determined to get them.
She pumped huge amounts of government/TAXPAYERS money into the National Coal Board, to increase coal production and stock-pile resources and into Central Electricity Generating Board to pile up stocks at power stations.
This was needed for her crusade.
The Coal-mines were still viable; expenses needed to reined in and the unions negotiated with but the industry didn't need to be obliterated nor the unions 'smashed' as Thatcher set out to do.
During her first year, inflation leapt from 9% to 20% and interest rates and unemployment rose sharply; Britain's manufacturing industry was destroyed.
She then, as Reagan did in America, set Britain on the path of importation of goods, borrowing and consumption and economic reliance on the financial services industy; this led to great wealth for a few in London and gave the illusion of a wealthy country.
Meanwhile, her promised 'trickle down' of wealth failed to materialise and social infrastructure collapsed.
Her de-regulation of the financial services sector she made Britain so reliant on, ultimately led to the near banking collapse of recent years; her policies were continued with by New Labour and Tony Blair.
This and the socially decrepit 'Broken Britain' the current Tory party are always banging on about, is her true legacy.

round tower huntsman

she was a rich bitch that had only contempt for the working class........if you were irish and working class she actually wanted to see you dead or doing life. she was a scumbag and i personally hope she hasnt a peacefull death.

KeithAFC

efb wrote: »

How many wars have Britain managed to win on their own?

Whats your point..

efb

KeithAFC wrote: »

Whats your point..

Can't finish what they start tbh- so they'll always be the US' poodle

FlutterinBantam

Nodin wrote: »

The exchange is there for any who care to read it. I'm not really too worried about false crowing from somebody who is incapable of explaining themselves.

Hmmm... you seem to have inability to understand plain English when it suits you.You always seem to want contrary and straightforward posts 'explained' for some reason.

Usually when confronted with the truth and not some socialist rhetoric.

You should get that problem seen to.

efb

But is she dead yet?

Please wait and die when I'm in London in Nov!

TheUsual

Evil bitch. The only good thing she did while in power was to turn Britain into an American state and a slave to the U.S. military. She's not dead yet but I will smile when she goes.

LordSutch

Lot of hatred here amongst Irish posters, Hmm, whats the beef with Mrs Thatch? what did she do to you guys :cool:
I can understand the coal miners in Britain disliking her, and the Argies in the 1980s, but . . .

Maybe she closed some Irish mines too ?

ch750536

If any one thing makes me smile each day it's the fact that she has lost her memory and has to be told each day that her poor husband is dead. She often asks for him. I would always follow up with 'and he hated you anyway you sour bitch.'

LordSutch

ch750536 wrote: »

If any one thing makes me smile each day it's the fact that she has lost her memory and has to be told each day that her poor husband is dead. She often asks for him. I would always follow up with 'and he hated you anyway you sour bitch.'

Charming :rolleyes:

Well come on then, whats drives your hatred of the woman?

iPlop

LordSutch wrote: »

Charming :rolleyes:

Well come on then, whats drives your hatred of the woman?

Are you serious?????????

LordSutch

Yes, I am bloody serious :mad:

If you are Irish, and you live in Ireland why hate this ex British PM ???

ch750536

She has to die before the 30 years is up on the Belgrano lie anyway, so she has a maximum of 2 years left.

iPlop

LordSutch wrote: »

Yes, I am bloody serious :mad:

If you are Irish, and you live in Ireland why hate this ex British PM ???

Northern Ireland
Main article: 1981 Irish hunger strike


Campaign UK, 1987. Troubled Images Exhibition, Linen Hall Library, Belfast, August 2010
The hunger strike was begun by a number of Provisional IRA and Irish National Liberation Army prisoners in Northern Ireland's Maze Prison to regain the status of political prisoners which had been revoked five years earlier under the preceding Labour government.[77] Bobby Sands began the strike, saying that he would fast until death unless prison inmates won concessions over their living conditions.[77] Thatcher refused to countenance a return to political status for the prisoners, famously declaring "Crime is crime is crime; it is not political"[77] and felt that Britain should not negotiate with terrorists.[78] However, despite holding this view in public, the British government made private contact with republican leaders in a bid to bring the hunger strikes to an end.[79] After Sands and nine more men had starved to death and the strike had ended, some rights were restored to paramilitary prisoners, but official recognition of political status was not granted.[80] Due to her actions Thatcher became an Irish Republican hate figure of Cromwellian proportions, with Sinn Féin politician Danny Morrison describing her as "the biggest bastard we have ever known" at the 1981 Sinn Féin Ard Fheis (party conference).[81]
Later that year, Thatcher and Irish Taoiseach Garret FitzGerald established the Anglo-Irish Inter-Governmental Council, which would act as a forum for meetings between the two governments.[82] On 15 November 1985, Thatcher and FitzGerald signed the Hillsborough Anglo-Irish Agreement; the first time a British government gave the Republic of Ireland an advisory role in the governance of Northern Ireland.


And the fact that every catholic/Irish man woman and child was treated as a terrorist with her policies up the north not just the guys in the maze.She gave the go ahead for the RUC to terrorise the catholic community ,break into peoples houses ,point guns at childrens heads etc....she was a lovely person:rolleyes:

LordSutch

Septic Leper wrote: »

Northern Ireland
Main article: 1981 Irish hunger strike . . .

(IRA hunger strike) Yes, and that was one of her strong points, she played 'hard ball' with terorists!

Fratton Fred

efb wrote: »

How many wars have Britain managed to win on their own?

Is this a trick question? is the answer "More than the US have"?

kraggy wrote: »

I have to head to bed now, but I'll get back to you tomorrow.

In the meantime, I'll leave you with this

War Crime: "...any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity"

The Argentinian ship was sailing away.

Ships have rudders, they can turn back in a moment. she was sent to sea (whilst the Argentines were at war) with the objective of driving away the Task Force. bearing in mind that a storm was brewing (which severely hampered the rescue of the survivors) it would have been very difficult for HMS Conqueror to keep tracking her, therefore the British had two choices, move the task force away from the Falklands to avoid running into her and her escorts, or sink her.

Running away isn't really an option when you are at war (Unless you are French) and have no need to, so sinking her was a necessity. The sinking served two purposes, firstly it meant the task force could continue with its planned invasion of the Falklands, secondly, it made it obvious there were submarines in the area and the remainder of the Argentine fleet headed back to port and remained there for the duration.

by the way, the bit from your definition you conveniently left out reads as follows

"War Crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of law which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill treatment, or deportation to slave labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages or devastation not justified by military necessity."

Nowhere in there does it class the sinking of an enemy's warship as a war crime.

the bolt

LordSutch wrote: »

Charming :rolleyes:

Well come on then, whats drives your hatred of the woman?

If I have to explain then you wouldnt understand.
Can you give me one reason why I shouldnt hate the bitch.

Nodin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Hmmm... you seem to have inability to understand plain English when it suits you.You always seem to want contrary and straightforward posts 'explained' for some reason.

Your post made no sense. I asked for an explanation, you refused to give one, and I extrapolated on that. You agreed with my conclusions, IMO. Now, be a good lad and stop whinging. It ill becomes a man.

c_man

kraggy wrote: »

In the Falklands War, she personally ordered the sinking of the Argentinian Naval Vesel, the Belgrano. It was a huge story. The British Navy had no right to attack the ship. It was not located where the British Government claimed at the time. In all, 323 Argentinian sailors perished.

The vessel was:

a. outside the exclusion zone
b. was sailing AWAY from the British vessel that torpedoed it.

Oh please. Was it sailing away to the other side of the world?

Even the captain of the Belgrano admits that the attack was legitimate! As upon reading, did the Argentinians.

Bottle_of_Smoke

kraggy wrote: »

In the Falklands War, she personally ordered the sinking of the Argentinian Naval Vesel, the Belgrano. It was a huge story. The British Navy had no right to attack the ship. It was not located where the British Government claimed at the time. In all, 323 Argentinian sailors perished.

The vessel was:

a. outside the exclusion zone
b. was sailing AWAY from the British vessel that torpedoed it.


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

The controversy lead to probably the only time where Margaret Thatcher was beaten in a public debate in such a convincing manner:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWOy23MLY1I

Doesn't appear to have been beaten at all there. The captain of the Belgrano said it was a legitimate attack.

Fail.

Fratton Fred

the bolt wrote: »

If I have to explain then you wouldnt understand.
Can you give me one reason why I shouldnt hate the bitch.

I've never met you, but i don't hate you, even though I have no reason not to.

normally, people don't go around hating other people for no reason, so asking why it is you hate her is not an unreasonable question.

ch750536

I hate her cus she's a bitch.