Prime Minister Thatcher -The Mod Made Thread

[Imperiatom]

Its a situation of the west, choosing the best of a bad bunch. That is the realities of being in government, somethings idealists from the left can't fathom as they are very rarely in power in modern Britain.

Yes. And the best in this case is not Pol Pot. But they helped the Khmer Rouge for some reason.

I mean, I don't think it's over ok to knowingly arm genocidal dictators. Though maybe that's just me being an idealistic lefty, heh.

It probably is you being that way. There is a third way of course and that is military intervention to keep the peace and build democracy, of course there are many who think this would be worse than the first two.

[Imperiatom]

She was sort of like a UK female Reagan.

Reagan copied thatcher.

[Napkiraly]

Yes. And the best in this case is not Pol Pot. But they helped the Khmer Rouge for some reason.

I mean, I don't think it's over ok to knowingly arm genocidal dictators. Though maybe that's just me being an idealistic lefty, heh.

It probably is you being that way. There is a third way of course and that is military intervention to keep the peace and build democracy, of course there are many who think this would be worse than the first two.

You really think the UK could have pulled off what the US failed to?

[Imperiatom]

Are you a socialist?

I asked first. :-)

I won't lie I'm pretty left!!!

Cos i don't mind leaving a socialist to hang

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_West ... nstituency) Where i live.

[Repes]

[Imperiatom]

It probably is you being that way. There is a third way of course and that is military intervention to keep the peace and build democracy, of course there are many who think this would be worse than the first two.

You really think the UK could have pulled off what the US failed to?

Malaya is a good example of how to beat an insurgency war. I did mean the Nato or the UN as a whole not Britain on their own.

[Souseiseki]

I asked first. :-)

I won't lie I'm pretty left!!!

Cos i don't mind leaving a socialist to hang

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_West ... nstituency) Where i live.

EP constitunecy: South East England

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

You really think the UK could have pulled off what the US failed to?

Malaya is a good example of how to beat an insurgency war. I did mean the Nato or the UN as a whole not Britain on their own.

Not really. The Chinese were not really all that friendly with the Malay...and some pretty major blunders by the British Army prolonged matters.

[Imperiatom]

Malaya is a good example of how to beat an insurgency war. I did mean the Nato or the UN as a whole not Britain on their own.

Not really. The Chinese were not really all that friendly with the Malay...and some pretty major blunders by the British Army prolonged matters.

Bid the British win? YES

Here is a report on the matter. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pu ... 5/R957.pdf

[Sibirsky]

This is the worst thing that has happened all year.

But not because of Thatcher.

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

Not really. The Chinese were not really all that friendly with the Malay...and some pretty major blunders by the British Army prolonged matters.

Bid the British win? YES

Here is a report on the matter. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pu ... 5/R957.pdf

Its not a good example of beating an insurgency. Given your inability to make that connection renders most other matters rather moot.

Also the word is "did" not "bid".

[Machtergreifung]

Not really. The Chinese were not really all that friendly with the Malay...and some pretty major blunders by the British Army prolonged matters.

Bid the British win? YES

Here is a report on the matter. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pu ... 5/R957.pdf

The British also won WW1. Does that make the Somme or Galipoli a perfect military campaign?

[The Godly Nations]

Bid the British win? YES

Here is a report on the matter. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pu ... 5/R957.pdf

Let's speak honestly with each other, Tory to Tory- which dictionary are you using?

I mean, earlier, you were telling me to look 'civilised' up in a dictionary and yet, your spelling and your grammar are simply atrocious.

[Imperiatom]

Bid the British win? YES

Here is a report on the matter. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pu ... 5/R957.pdf

The British also won WW1. Does that make the Somme or Galipoli a perfect military campaign?

The sign of a good army is not whether they make mistakes as all army's invariably do from time to time, but whether after such mistakes in a battle or campaign are made that a solution is found that then betters the enemy. This happened in WW1 and the Malayan emergency, the right strategy was eventually found. The British army has only lost one war since 1660. Yes plenty of mistakes have been made over the last 350 years but only once has the British military failed either a white peace or and net gain for Britain.

[Souseiseki]

The British also won WW1. Does that make the Somme or Galipoli a perfect military campaign?

The sign of a good army is not whether they make mistakes as all army's invariably do from time to time, but whether after such mistakes in a battle or campaign are made that a solution is found that then betters the enemy. This happened in WW1 and the Malayan emergency, the right strategy was eventually found. The British army has only lost one war since 1660. Yes plenty of mistakes have been made over the last 350 years but only once has the British military failed either a white peace or and net gain for Britain.

Putting aside our question of how an army that came into existence in 1707 could not lose wars since 1660 I'd like a source for that statement.

[Imperiatom]

The sign of a good army is not whether they make mistakes as all army's invariably do from time to time, but whether after such mistakes in a battle or campaign are made that a solution is found that then betters the enemy. This happened in WW1 and the Malayan emergency, the right strategy was eventually found. The British army has only lost one war since 1660. Yes plenty of mistakes have been made over the last 350 years but only once has the British military failed either a white peace or and net gain for Britain.

Putting aside our question of how an army that came into existence in 1707 could not lose wars since 1660 I'd like a source for that statement.

"The making of the British army from the English civil war to the war on terror" by Alan Mallinson. Page 93, "sixty years after Utrecht, on the eve of the american war, which would see the first and only time the complete defeat of British arms."

He traces the Birth of the British army back to the birth of the new model army in 1645.

[Souseiseki]

Putting aside our question of how an army that came into existence in 1707 could not lose wars since 1660 I'd like a source for that statement.

"The making of the British army from the English civil war to the war on terror" by Alan Mallinson. Page 93, "sixty years after Utrecht, on the eve of the american war, which would see the first and only time the complete defeat of British arms."

He traces the Birth of the British army back to the birth of the new model army in 1645.

the complete defeat of british arms is a bit specific and weird. ever wondered why it was the napoleonic wars? does losing three of the four anglo-dutch wars not count because you like totally won number four? the anglo-afghan wars? how did the suez crisis work out? turkish war of independence? the cod "wars"?

[Napkiraly]

"The making of the British army from the English civil war to the war on terror" by Alan Mallinson. Page 93, "sixty years after Utrecht, on the eve of the american war, which would see the first and only time the complete defeat of British arms."

He traces the Birth of the British army back to the birth of the new model army in 1645.

the complete defeat of british arms is a bit specific and weird. ever wondered why it was the napoleonic wars? does losing three of the four anglo-dutch wars not count because you like totally won number four? the anglo-afghan wars? how did the suez crisis work out? turkish war of independence? the cod "wars"?

The First Boer War as well.

[Machtergreifung]

the complete defeat of british arms is a bit specific and weird. ever wondered why it was the napoleonic wars? does losing three of the four anglo-dutch wars not count because you like totally won number four? the anglo-afghan wars? how did the suez crisis work out? turkish war of independence? the cod "wars"?

The First Boer War as well.

And call Ireland a draw.

[The Godly Nations]

the complete defeat of british arms is a bit specific and weird. ever wondered why it was the napoleonic wars? does losing three of the four anglo-dutch wars not count because you like totally won number four? the anglo-afghan wars? how did the suez crisis work out? turkish war of independence? the cod "wars"?

The First Boer as well.

None of those were real wars because the definition of war requires that we win. According to "The Making of the British Army from the English Civil War to the War on Terror" (which Imperiatom cites), Mr Alan Mallinson says, 'sixty years after Utrecht, on the eve of the american war, which would see the first and only time the complete defeat of British arms'. If those were really wars, then we should have won them- and since we did not achieve total victory, ergo, its not a war.


And, if you feel there is a preposition missing somewhere in that quotation, it is probably because Mr Mallinson's command of English is just as fluent as Mr Imperiatom's.

[Imperiatom]

"The making of the British army from the English civil war to the war on terror" by Alan Mallinson. Page 93, "sixty years after Utrecht, on the eve of the american war, which would see the first and only time the complete defeat of British arms."

He traces the Birth of the British army back to the birth of the new model army in 1645.

the complete defeat of british arms is a bit specific and weird. ever wondered why it was the napoleonic wars? does losing three of the four anglo-dutch wars not count because you like totally won number four? the anglo-afghan wars? how did the suez crisis work out? turkish war of independence? the cod "wars"?

The first Anglo afghan war was the east india company. The second war we gained control of their foreign affairs. the third war was a tactical victory as we repulsed the invasion our indian army was not defeated. Suez crisis was still a military victory in the same way the US won in Vietnam. Turkish war We won the de jure control of large parts of the middle east such as Egypt, cyprus and Palestine, plus militarily was not a defeat ether. We militarily won the first dutch war, The second war was inconclusive. Third war was militarily inconclusive but Charles achieved his political aims and decided to terminate involvement in the war because of the threat of France controlling the whole of the channel coast opposite England. The Forth war was a victory with modest territorial gains whilst at the same time fighting the Patriots the french and the Spanish. The British Military was not defeated in any of the wars above.

Cod Dispute was settled by diplomatic means. WAR:a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country. That's not a war.

[Souseiseki]

the complete defeat of british arms is a bit specific and weird. ever wondered why it was the napoleonic wars? does losing three of the four anglo-dutch wars not count because you like totally won number four? the anglo-afghan wars? how did the suez crisis work out? turkish war of independence? the cod "wars"?

The first Anglo afghan war was the east india company. The second war we gained control of their foreign affairs. the third war was a tactical victory as we repulsed the invasion our indian army was not defeated. Suez crisis was still a military victory in the same way the US won in Vietnam. Turkish war We won the de jure control of large parts of the middle east such as Egypt, cyprus and Palestine, plus militarily was not a defeat ether. We militarily won the first dutch war, The second war was inconclusive. Third war was militarily inconclusive but Charles achieved his political aims and decided to terminate involvement in the war because of the threat of France controlling the whole of the channel coast opposite England. The Forth war was a victory with modest territorial gains whilst at the same time fighting the Patriots the french and the Spanish. The British Military was not defeated in any of the wars above.

Cod Dispute was settled by diplomatic means. WAR:a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country. That's not a war.

lol so yeah, losing a war doesn't count as long as you eventually manage to win the war that comes 40 years later?

i dunno man. i think there was a little bit of violence, and we definitely lost.

[Imperiatom]

the complete defeat of british arms is a bit specific and weird. ever wondered why it was the napoleonic wars? does losing three of the four anglo-dutch wars not count because you like totally won number four? the anglo-afghan wars? how did the suez crisis work out? turkish war of independence? the cod "wars"?

The First Boer War as well.

The boars had to accept that the queen and the British had control of foreign policy in return for the removal of British troops and self control over internal matters. the boars did not chive their aim of Independence.

[Imperiatom]

The first Anglo afghan war was the east india company. The second war we gained control of their foreign affairs. the third war was a tactical victory as we repulsed the invasion our indian army was not defeated. Suez crisis was still a military victory in the same way the US won in Vietnam. Turkish war We won the de jure control of large parts of the middle east such as Egypt, cyprus and Palestine, plus militarily was not a defeat ether. We militarily won the first dutch war, The second war was inconclusive. Third war was militarily inconclusive but Charles achieved his political aims and decided to terminate involvement in the war because of the threat of France controlling the whole of the channel coast opposite England. The Forth war was a victory with modest territorial gains whilst at the same time fighting the Patriots the french and the Spanish. The British Military was not defeated in any of the wars above.

Cod Dispute was settled by diplomatic means. WAR:a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country. That's not a war.

lol so yeah, losing a war doesn't count as long as you eventually manage to win the war that comes 40 years later?

i dunno man. i think there was a little bit of violence, and we definitely lost.

Which war above did the British military lose outright?

Yeah we were diplomatically raped in the cod dispute, but a state of war never existed between us and Iceland so the military were not defeated.

Edit: If we had gone to war, What do you think would have happened?

[Napkiraly]

The First Boer War as well.

The boars had to accept that the queen and the British had control of foreign policy in return for the removal of British troops and self control over internal matters. the boars did not chive their aim of Independence.

May I remind you that Canada was an independent country despite not having control of its foreign affairs until 1937.

Note how it is called an independent country from 1881-1902.