Rayvin

Agreed. Although to be honest, at this point, I'm struggling to respond in any way whatsoever to our recent performances. This isn't the club I grew up watching, it doesn't even deserve to be considered the shell of that club.

Agree with that - de Jong is likely at least competent in centre mid, I really don't understand what it is about him that's putting McClaren off.

Football became gentrified and we along with it. You only disapprove because alcohol fucks up your chi.

I don't care how pretentious that sounded.

God, I fucking love wine.

Agreed - it's not introducing anything new really. It's still a good game but it could have been more than that. I don't know why these developers don't push the boat further sometimes. The settlement building minutemen quests are new and different, but they could have done so much more with that. I'm yet to understand what the real point of that is. I built a farm with an artillery canon for instance - this pleased me for a while but like hell am I really going to need to call in an artillery strike against anything.

At this point I think picking one of the weaker ones, taking him out in front of the others and having him shot would be the only form of motivation that they'd respond to. The message could be 'one of you dies per game lost'

The sad truth is that Sturgeon would be an excellent Labour leader if she hadn't ended up with another party entirely. It's all irrelevant now though, Renton is absolutely right that we'll have the Tories for at least 9 years. I just hope by the end of that someone comes along with something worth believing in/voting for.

That insult should have been in the roster at the end of last season, it deserves better than 6 months after he's left us.

This is a bit of a double edged sword for me. I did get what I wished for, and I remain pleased about it. I didn't expect that he would win the next election, but I didn't expect anyone we could have voted for would either. For me, voting Corbyn was about forcing Labour away from the new centre as defined by the Tories, and back over to the left of centre (in the long run). I'm not going to vote for Labour if they don't broadly represent my thinking. If that means the Tories, then so be it. It's Labour that's lost me though, not the other way around. That said - the Tories make things harder for some than others, and I can fully appreciate that people like you, given the effect it has had on your family, will be dismayed by the stance of people like me. All I can say to that really is that I can only vote for what I believe in, and I fundamentally didn't believe in the policies of anyone other than Corbyn, regardless of how electable he is.

Other than the fact that, had it been true, the government wouldn't have been able to continue spending money? It was a fucking stupid note to leave but surely CT, surely you can see that it clearly wasn't true. If it had been true, the country would very literally have collapsed. We would have had the IMF in here immediately trying to do a Greece style recovery job. Did that happen?

As they say, you haven't posted your own thoughts. Does the above statement include you then? I'm not really familiar with the guy, so yes, ignorant in my case, but a quick wiki viewing suggests that he's the sort of person who, if there was a secret illuminati-esque organisation running the world, would be at the forefront of it. About right?

Yeah, on the one hand it's nice to see that - on the other hand, knowing that bunch tossers that play for us, we're likely to see some form of mass exodus in January.

And so the cycle begins again. It's like a microcosm of what's happening in the Middle East in general, this thread.

That is awesome

Is that you?

Come to think of it, this would be Trident's time to shine.

Technically either we'd fucking have to, or we'd have to say that the whole NATO treaty is a sham and admit that we're afraid of a confrontation with Russia. That said, I'm still not convinced by the Russian military - as a country they're already entirely encircled by the US. Parky, you mentioned a war on multiple fronts but that's exactly what Russia would get too. Can it really take Europe and the US combined - especially with US military bases in Europe? Also, China would surely be checked by India and I'm convinced that Japan haven't just been sitting on their hands for the last 50 years as far as militaristic arming goes. It's worth noting that China only have one aircraft carrier and it's still being repaired - would China really risk going head to head with the US Pacific fleet with such a flimsy navy? Worst case scenario to my mind is a Sino-Russian alliance, but I just don't know if I see it. I reckon the West has it in it to contain this if it happens, but we'd probably lose mainland Europe in the process, and the whole world would go to shit. That said, like fuck is anyone going to let it come to this

Well, we could leave relatively stable if rather brutal regimes in place to run each country, thus ensuring that groups like ISIS have no ability to get started and each country's economy isn't blown up when the bombs dro-- oh no shit, we're systematically purging all of those. Funny how that keeps coming back to bite us... But seriously, it'd be a lot of fucking hard work to restore anything from here. We have no credibility, no trust on a local level, and no genuine regard for the wellbeing of any of the civilians living in these countries - something they're clearly aware of. From the position we currently occupy, there is no easy answer. In principle though, had we not continued to try to 'solve' this with explosives, that would be the answer. What's your solution exactly? How do we win this by force? I don't think we can, so we either have perpetual war, or we actually try to engage the real issues. As for those over here who radicalise, we in the West have our fair share of non-Muslim psychos as well - the US for instance has a huge number of them. Sure they don't have a cause to unite behind, but they exist, and they exist because they're disillusioned with life. I will say however, that the Muslim community in Britain has a general stance, in my opinion, of being more isolationist than many other ethnic groups - this means they're more often on the fringes of society, and are more likely to feel separate and I suppose, more likely to have their disaffected young take up with crazies like ISIS. But with that said, I don't know if I think they're in that isolationist position because of their religion... it could be more about the way that the world now views Muslims in the fallout of terrorism.

Gotta hate Pardew. Even when he's not running our team he's still managing to fuck things up for us against Sunderland

Are they rising in line with or ahead of inflation? Serious question, am actually curious.

It'd be a better use for the money we're about to waste blowing them up. And as for the first point, I'm just curious really as to why all Muslims aren't blowing themselves up. I wonder why this particular group were more susceptible to radicalisation... if it was simply the persuasive power of Islam, surely everyone would be doing it. Clearly there are other factors at play, and therefore, there are other factors that can be addressed.

Pardew continuing his impressive run against Sunderland...

I think it was directed more at the farmers and such who actually make up ISIS as a core group. There's always going to be disaffected loonies, but you can minimise it by investing in more widespread education. If they were blowing themselves up because their religion told them to, why aren't the other billion Muslims doing it?