Politics

[Monkeys Fist 42204]

8 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

 I saw that….thought he might be Yemeni from Shields?…

 

txtd my mate this morning asking him if he’d seen it, he joined the Marines at 17 straight from school in 1981, did his training & passed out at the beginning of 1982, just in time to turn 18 on Canberra en route to the South Atlantic… this is what he said in reply 

 

 

 

 

 

Aye, possibly? 
 

I thought the other lad, a medic from Manchester area , was very honest- his description of the absolute hell on the Galahad, and his very candid talk about how PTSD affected him. 
 

There was a lad a few years above me in school, who lived only 100 yards from me in Killy, who died out there- Colin Davison, in the Marines. 
 

He was a lovely lad, very quiet and the last person you’d expect to join the Army, never mind the Marines. 

 

What a waste. 

[Monkeys Fist 42204]

7 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Brig. Tony Wilson no doubt fed the story to the press to cover his arse

FYP 

 

 

[PaddockLad 17165]

3 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

FYP 

 

 

There would be no doubt a fuckin lackey civil servant at the MoD in London doing his dirty work but aye…

[Gemmill 44561]

 

 

Who's the woman next to the one asking questions?

 

 

 

[Howmanheyman 32893]

17 hours ago, Alex said:

Not sure if anyone caught it last night but there was an excellent, if harrowing, documentary about the Falklands War from the people who fought in it (in the main). If you ever need an insight how politics, media, propaganda etc work to misinform the public then this is it. With particular reference to the attack on the Sir Galahad, what has only been allowed to surface some 40 years later is the sheer unnecessary nature of the terrible loss of life, injuries and PTSD suffered by those onboard. It was always said at the time and afterwards that operation was carried out because it was essential to create another front, from the south side to attack Port Stanley (held by the Argentines). The British forces involved and interviewed said not only that it wasn’t the case but it also hampered / delayed what should have been a more direct overland assault from the west (where the eventual decisive attack came from). The ship also had its warship escort removed for reasons unknown. On top of that there was an additional aspect added to the mission that meant they wouldn’t be able to disembark at night due to the delays this caused. All this meant air strikes were able to be called in while all onboard were sitting ducks. This was by no means the only shambolic mistake in the conflict but it’s sickening that politicians and senior military officials bathed in jingoistic glory instead of taking responsibility for this and the other mistakes. 

I've seen the odd show in the past about the Falklands and most weren't sugar coated, where did you see it, Alex?

[Alex 34954]

1 hour ago, Howmanheyman said:

I've seen the odd show in the past about the Falklands and most weren't sugar coated, where did you see it, Alex?

Channel 4 so I would imagine you’ll be able to see it on catch-up. It’s not so much documentaries in the past sugar coating events. It’s more the suppression of things around the attack of the Sir Galahad and the battle at Goose Green. It’s certainly the first time I’ve heard it said that they were both unnecessary parts of the conflict which were detrimental to the British side from a tactical POV (as well as the unnecessary loss of life / injuries / PTSD). Obviously no war is going to be perfectly executed on the ground but they seemed like pretty grave errors of judgement from the top brass. Also stuff like Atlantic Conveyor not being properly protected and its being attacked led to an acute shortage of supplies, helicopters etc. 

[Howmanheyman 32893]

3 minutes ago, Alex said:

Channel 4 so I would imagine you’ll be able to see it on catch-up. It’s not so much documentaries in the past sugar coating events. It’s more the suppression of things around the attack of the Sir Galahad and the battle at Goose Green. It’s certainly the first time I’ve heard it said that they were both unnecessary parts of the conflict which were detrimental to the British side from a tactical POV (as well as the unnecessary loss of life / injuries / PTSD). Obviously no war is going to be perfectly executed on the ground but they seemed like pretty grave errors of judgement from the top brass. Also stuff like Atlantic Conveyor not being properly protected and its being attacked led to an acute shortage of supplies, helicopters etc. 

Pretty sure I saw a channel 4 doc a few years ago and it was quite scathing of the planning and blasé attitude towards massive risks that was taken with others lives. They were sitting ducks. I wonder if this is a repeat or a new programme?

[Renton 21450]

I'll watch it f I get a chance, not keen on 4 OD mind. I was 11 when this kicked off, as a kid it was pretty exciting. Looking at wiki, what amazes me is how quickly we mobilised the task force. It set sail about 3 days after the invasion, including the commissioning of the Canberra. How the fuck were those logistics possible? 

[Alex 34954]

35 minutes ago, Howmanheyman said:

Pretty sure I saw a channel 4 doc a few years ago and it was quite scathing of the planning and blasé attitude towards massive risks that was taken with others lives. They were sitting ducks. I wonder if this is a repeat or a new programme?

It’s a new one I think as it said it was the first time a lot of those involved had spoken about it in the 40 years since. And it’s the 40th anniversary this year 

[NJS 4375]

58 minutes ago, Renton said:

I'll watch it f I get a chance, not keen on 4 OD mind. I was 11 when this kicked off, as a kid it was pretty exciting. Looking at wiki, what amazes me is how quickly we mobilised the task force. It set sail about 3 days after the invasion, including the commissioning of the Canberra. How the fuck were those logistics possible? 

A year later and her cuts would have made it impossible for the navy. 

 

The yards on the Tyne ramped up production to finish a carrier iirc and were rewarded with no more orders and eventual closure. 

[Monkeys Fist 42204]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

Channel 4 so I would imagine you’ll be able to see it on catch-up. It’s not so much documentaries in the past sugar coating events. It’s more the suppression of things around the attack of the Sir Galahad and the battle at Goose Green. It’s certainly the first time I’ve heard it said that they were both unnecessary parts of the conflict which were detrimental to the British side from a tactical POV (as well as the unnecessary loss of life / injuries / PTSD). Obviously no war is going to be perfectly executed on the ground but they seemed like pretty grave errors of judgement from the top brass. Also stuff like Atlantic Conveyor not being properly protected and its being attacked led to an acute shortage of supplies, helicopters etc. 

What surprised me, aside from the fact that they were both totally avoidable losses of life, was how unequivocally Michael Rose and Julian Thompson blamed Wilson for it, and their criticism of how the entire South Flank was unnecessary and detrimental to the conflict. 
It’s worth noting that the only military commander involved in the war not to get an honour the following year was Wilson. 

 

[PaddockLad 17165]

1 hour ago, Renton said:

I'll watch it f I get a chance, not keen on 4 OD mind. I was 11 when this kicked off, as a kid it was pretty exciting. Looking at wiki, what amazes me is how quickly we mobilised the task force. It set sail about 3 days after the invasion, including the commissioning of the Canberra. How the fuck were those logistics possible? 

 

I was 12 going on 13, think the destroyers offshore started the whole thing off by shelling the runway at Port Stanley airport on the Saturday night after match of the day... BBC cut to a news flash straight away and we sat there watching the reports come in. Was still up when dad came in from the pub...he cheerily informed me " if it goes on as long as WW2 you'll be sent there to fight" , I think I protested that I was too young but he said "only 5 years till you're 18!" which gave me something to think about...his father was conscripted for WW1, so was his maternal grandfather as an ex regular soldier in the Boer war, and he'd been made to do National Service for two year in the jungles of Malaya... I think he genuinely thought I'd be next

[Howmanheyman 32893]

I was dying to go and my dad, and loads of my family had been in the forces as well but I was only 8 and a half so I had to miss out. (Thank absolute fuck).

Edited March 29, 2022 by Howmanheyman

[Gemmill 44561]

1 hour ago, Howmanheyman said:

I was dying to go and my dad, and loads of my family had been in the forces as well but I was only 8 and a half so I had to miss out. (Thank absolute fuck).

 

Should have sent you, dressed like that kid who went to school as Les Ferdinand. 

[Isegrim 9741]

https://twitter.com/ukiswitheu/status/1508856488995037189?s=21&t=Zxp1GtLuRQpXmaSDwZZJFQ

[Isegrim 9741]

 

[PaddockLad 17165]

Priti Patel broke the ministerial code when an independent enquiry found that she had been bullying colleagues. She’s still in office but the Prime Minister’s personal advisor on the ministerial code resigned because the Prime Minister refused to sack her when she refused to resign, the PM using the phrase in a WhatsApp message to cabinet colleagues  “time to form a square around the prittster” 

 

Fuck all will happen. The back benchers will fall into line. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Alex 34954]

10 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Priti Patel broke the ministerial code when an independent enquiry found that she had been bullying colleagues. She’s still in office but the Prime Minister’s personal advisor on the ministerial code resigned because the Prime Minister refused to sack her when she refused to resign, the PM using the phrase in a WhatsApp message to cabinet colleagues  “time to form a square around the prittster” 

 

Fuck all will happen. The back benchers will fall into line. 

 

 

 

 

 

She was basically guilty of treason before getting the gig that so it was relatively trivial 

[ewerk 30409]

13 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Priti Patel broke the ministerial code when an independent enquiry found that she had been bullying colleagues. She’s still in office but the Prime Minister’s personal advisor on the ministerial code resigned because the Prime Minister refused to sack her when she refused to resign, the PM using the phrase in a WhatsApp message to cabinet colleagues  “time to form a square around the prittster” 

 

Fuck all will happen. The back benchers will fall into line. 

 

 

 

 

 

The thing is that we’re now a maximum of two years out from a general election. If the public mood turns then those back benchers, and particularly the new intake, will worry about their own seats. There’s a point where it becomes too late to get rid of him, they will be having serious conversations before they get there.

[Renton 21450]

Things are about to get very hard for a lot of people. I read somewhere that by next Christmas literally half the population will be in fuel poverty. I doubt cost of living will be resolved in 2 years. I think the tories are fucked whoever is in charge. Johnson has no heir, and too many of the cabinet are too closely linked to him to distance themselves. That leaves who, Hunt, maybe? Not that I'm happy, they've well and truly fucked us up for a generation now. I've given up caring. The public get what the public want. 

[PaddockLad 17165]

 

[ewerk 30409]

 

 

Firstly, fair play to him/her (I'm not sure which pronoun to use).

 

But also, it looks like this could put the kibosh on Johnson's new tactic of weaponising trans rights.

[Renton 21450]

4 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

 

Firstly, fair play to him/her (I'm not sure which pronoun to use).

 

But also, it looks like this could put the kibosh on Johnson's new tactic of weaponising trans rights.

 

Or more likely Jamie will be hounded out the party unfortunately. Johnson won't give this up as a wedge issue. 

[Renton 21450]

12 hours ago, Renton said:

Things are about to get very hard for a lot of people. I read somewhere that by next Christmas literally half the population will be in fuel poverty. I doubt cost of living will be resolved in 2 years. I think the tories are fucked whoever is in charge. Johnson has no heir, and too many of the cabinet are too closely linked to him to distance themselves. That leaves who, Hunt, maybe? Not that I'm happy, they've well and truly fucked us up for a generation now. I've given up caring. The public get what the public want. 

 

Quoting myself but have a look at this graph which maps changes to standard of living as well as inequalities in this, by PM and electoral terms. Look at how under Thatcher wealth inequality increased massively. Look at the Blair years, especially the early ones, where wealth increased across the board, for all. Then look at the performance of the shambolic performance of the more recent tories, especially Johnson, which shows consistent declining living standards for everyone, but especially the poorest. Some of Johnson's figures are projected but imo they're probably over optimistic given the energy crisis. 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2022 by Renton

[Christmas Tree 4713]

10 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Quoting myself but have a look at this graph which maps changes to standard of living as well as inequalities in this, by PM and electoral terms. Look at how under Thatcher wealth inequality increased massively. Look at the Blair years, especially the early ones, where wealth increased across the board, for all. Then look at the performance of the shambolic performance of the more recent tories, especially Johnson, which shows consistent declining living standards for everyone, but especially the poorest. Some of Johnson's figures are projected but imo they're probably over optimistic given the energy crisis. 

 

 

 

 

****NOT A POLITICAL POINT****
 

Im trying to rack my brains? What happened 2001-2005.

 

Obviously 2005-2010 is skewed by the crash but I just can’t remember what explains the previous 5 years.