Prime Minister Thatcher -The Mod Made Thread

[Britannic Realms]

'Shite' is used to Britain, mostly, as a way to try and say something's shit without technically swearing. Like the Irish use 'feck'.

"RIP LADY THATCHER - She did the right thing. Especially in Indonesia and Vietnam."

You thought that enabling/supporting genocide and protecting the Khmer Rouge was just SO GOOD that you just HAD to let the ENTIRE forums know with every single post you make.

I am... not sure what to say about that.

Well, I dislike it when people use two things to cover up all of the good things Thatcher did. It usually goes like this:

Person 1: "RIP Lady Thatcher, she privatised the ineffective industries."
Person 2: "They were fine nationalised."
Person 1: *Gives several good reasons and sources about these industries*
Person 2: "Oh well, she supported genocide"

Essentially, it's playing the genocide card when things do go your way.

As I despise that so much, I put things like that in my signature to annoy those kinds of people.

[Soviet Post Punk]

As I despise that so much, I put things like that in my signature to annoy those kinds of people.

That's pretty much the textbook definition of trolling, kiddo.

[Britannic Realms]

As I despise that so much, I put things like that in my signature to annoy those kinds of people.

That's pretty much the textbook definition of trolling, kiddo.

Not to mention that I actually do support what she did in those two countries. And, hang on, I'm pretty sure troll-naming is against the rules too, and that is what your comment sounds like to me.

[Soviet Post Punk]

Not to mention that I actually do support what she did in those two countries. And, hang on, I'm pretty sure troll-naming is against the rules too, and that is what your comment sounds like to me.

Not unreasonable at all though considering you pretty much just said "genocide is good get mad u people who arent morally disgusting XD"

How the fuck am I supposed to know your opinions are genuinely that shit?

[Souseiseki]

"RIP LADY THATCHER - She did the right thing. Especially in Indonesia and Vietnam."

You thought that enabling/supporting genocide and protecting the Khmer Rouge was just SO GOOD that you just HAD to let the ENTIRE forums know with every single post you make.

I am... not sure what to say about that.

Well, I dislike it when people use two things to cover up all of the good things Thatcher did. It usually goes like this:

Person 1: "RIP Lady Thatcher, she privatised the ineffective industries."
Person 2: "They were fine nationalised."
Person 1: *Gives several good reasons and sources about these industries*
Person 2: "Oh well, she supported genocide"

Essentially, it's playing the genocide card when things do go your way.

As I despise that so much, I put things like that in my signature to annoy those kinds of people.

She did a lot more than the industry thing, yes. People will not focus on one part of her regime forever, indeed to your detriment.

Supporting genocide is a very fucking big thing yes. I'm sorry you're angry people keep brining up genocide and other bad things she did to cover up all the good she did.

Yes. You're declaring support for fucking Pol Pot and Suharto in your sig because lol the genocide card. This'll annoy the dour faced anti-genocide squad. Good fucking job. We're all very annoyed at you.

That's pretty much the textbook definition of trolling, kiddo.

Not to mention that I actually do support what she did in those two countries. And, hang on, I'm pretty sure troll-naming is against the rules too, and that is what your comment sounds like to me.

So you actually do support supporting genocide. Please, use this thread to tell us why you're ironically supporting Pol Pot and Suharto to annoy people, but j/k lol I actually do support them.

[Britannic Realms]

Not to mention that I actually do support what she did in those two countries. And, hang on, I'm pretty sure troll-naming is against the rules too, and that is what your comment sounds like to me.

Not unreasonable at all though considering you pretty much just said "genocide is good get mad u people who arent morally disgusting XD"

How the fuck am I supposed to know your opinions are genuinely that shit?

It's nice to know that, funding regime = being responsible for genocide. My sig NEVER claimed to support genocide.

[Souseiseki]

Millions of people were forced out of their homes and killed. People who wore glasses where killed.

Thousands were dragged out of their homes in the middle of the night and tortured to death.

Genocide was committed. Innocent civilians were cut down by our good friends with British supplied machine guns. Villages were bombed with British jets. They knew this was happening.

Thatcher defended this. Thatcher protected this. She make it possible for it to go on. When people like Pinochet were arrested for this, she tried to get them released.

This is what you are supporting in your sig to "annoy" people. This is what you proclaim now to actually support. I want to make it very clear this is what you're doing, and have it clarified you KNOW this is what you're doing.

[Soviet Post Punk]

It's nice to know that, funding regime = being responsible for genocide. My sig NEVER claimed to support genocide.

Oh i'm so sorry i upset/offended you (lolthatsexactlywhatyouaretryingtodotoeveryonewhoisntmental) )':

next time i'll carefully phrase it to spare your feelings - you don't like genocide, you just like giving money to people who do!

so much better

[Souseiseki]

Not unreasonable at all though considering you pretty much just said "genocide is good get mad u people who arent morally disgusting XD"

How the fuck am I supposed to know your opinions are genuinely that shit?

It's nice to know that, funding regime = being responsible for genocide. My sig NEVER claimed to support genocide.

Yes. Funding genocide = being responsible for genocide. Military and economic aid to genocidal regimes = supporting genocide.

Oh, so you're only claiming to support supporting genocide, big fucking difference. When people are fucking murdered by British trained troops with British weapons we'll fucking tell them oh we're not fucking responsible, we just make it possible. I'm sure they'll be very understanding,

[Britannic Realms]

Millions of people were forced out of their homes and killed. People who wore glasses where killed.

Thousands were dragged out of their homes in the middle of the night and tortured to death.

Genocide was committed. Innocent civilians were cut down by our good friends with British supplied machine guns. Villages were bombed with British jets. They knew this was happening.

Thatcher defended this. Thatcher protected this. She make it possible for it to go on. When people like Pinochet were arrested for this, she tried to get them released.

This is what you are supporting in your sig to "annoy" people. This is what you proclaim now to actually support. I want to make it very clear this is what you're doing, and have it clarified you KNOW this is what you're doing.

Did Thatcher go to these countries and murder people herself? No. Read the wording in my sig - "She did the right thing. Especially in Indonesia and Vietnam." The key words being 'she did', not anyone else, her. I'm indicating that her supporting the regimes was the right thing to do for this country.

[Soviet Post Punk]

Did Thatcher go to these countries and murder people herself?

Something something Hitler.

No. Read the wording in my sig - "She did the right thing. Especially in Indonesia and Vietnam." The key words being 'she did', not anyone else, her. I'm indicating that her supporting the regimes was the right thing to do for this country.

No really, how?

[Napkiraly]

The NHS is something for her hellspawn to take on I'm afraid. Gotta do something with our oil.

I agree. They aren't doing enough with the NHS. Cut faster.

Because a decrease in care is exactly what we should be aiming for.

[Souseiseki]

Millions of people were forced out of their homes and killed. People who wore glasses where killed.

Thousands were dragged out of their homes in the middle of the night and tortured to death.

Genocide was committed. Innocent civilians were cut down by our good friends with British supplied machine guns. Villages were bombed with British jets. They knew this was happening.

Thatcher defended this. Thatcher protected this. She make it possible for it to go on. When people like Pinochet were arrested for this, she tried to get them released.

This is what you are supporting in your sig to "annoy" people. This is what you proclaim now to actually support. I want to make it very clear this is what you're doing, and have it clarified you KNOW this is what you're doing.

Did Thatcher go to these countries and murder people herself? No. Read the wording in my sig - "She did the right thing. Especially in Indonesia and Vietnam." The key words being 'she did', not anyone else, her. I'm indicating that her supporting the regimes was the right thing to do for this country.

Yes. So she fucking supported genocidal regimes and so do you. You support a genocidal regime, YOU ARE SUPPORTING A GENOCIDAL REGIME. YOU ARE SAYING A GENOCIDAL REGIME WAS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY. YOU ARE SAYING PROTECTING THE FUCKING KHMER ROUGE WAS A GOOD THING. And you have the fucking audacity to complain about people being disrespectful to the dead.

Did Hitler personally murder all the Jews? No. Do we give a fuck? Fuck no.

She gave them the weapons to use. When people tried to fucking end it she supported the people who were committing genocide.

Again, let me make this very fucking clear to you.

In the case of the genocidal dictator and the people having genocide committed against them, she took the side of the genocidal dictator. And you are saying not only was this right, it was good for the country. Do you need to be told why genocide is wrong? Do you need to be told why giving genocidal dictators weapons and protecting their regimes is wrong? Are you aware the definition of treason in many countries includes shelter and material support? That you don't personally have to do it to bear responsibility?

[Imperiatom]

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?

America and the rest of Europe would have told Britain to stop fighting a power with next to no military capability.

Have you ever written a 735 page book on the military history of any nation and served 35 years as an officer in that army rising to the rank of brigadier whilst also holding the job of military attache?


Edit: He also has nearly 30 pages of citations, notes, and recommendations for further reading.

I read Guderian's book myself. Doesn't make the book worth a academic damn, seeing as he seems to forget key events around sensitive issues that could affect his public image. Ditto for most of the German WW2 generals.

quote="Imperiatom";p="13914447"]

I would hope not, if my book turned out as incompetently written and researched as Mr Mallinson's book.

And if he served the nation, good for him and God be with him, but maybe he should have done some research prior to writing his book- and maybe attend an adult literacy class.

Speaking of which, you never did quite tell which dictionary you have been using, which would account for your incompetence in English.

Or is it the fault of the schools- Oh damn that Thatcher!- thanks to the old cow cutting the funds, this poor soul can't communicate in the English language.

Edit: It was either Swift or Pope (one of the Scribblerians) who mentions a practice, some centuries ago, which they attribute to the modern authors- that is, of collecting titles of books to boast their acquaintance with them, as one would of Lords. It seems our good Brigadier had followed upon his illustrious predecessors (whom Pope immortalised as the Dunces of the Dunciad) by imitating their practices. Had he opened those books, however, maybe he would put some consideration into it before making the claim that Britain never lost a war after the American Wars.

Maybe you should attend a read the book before one make's sweeping statements class?

He uses extracts and quotes from these books he mentions through the main body of his work. Be they the first hand accounts of diary extracts to out of other academic sources. "the first and only time the complete defeat of British arms" this key phrase is accurate.

I find it sad how some individual's such as yourself will dismiss the academic work of another without having read the book or any of the books or first hand sources he quotes. It's rather pathetic that you don't have any academic sources to back up your view that the Army suffered complete defeat more than once. Having read quoted and cited books he has personally studied for the writing of his own book your "EDIT" sounds like a large dose of both sour grapes and an example of your ignorance. If you have any academic books on the subject that contradict what he said then let me know! If you don't then i suggest you read a few to become better informed on the subject before you make such unintelligent sweeping statements on the work of another and all of those who he as used to put across his view.

I've read works that have more extracts than words actually written by the author. Again, still doesn't make them worth a damn. You can state that the moon is green, then have quotes and extracts galore - it doesn't make your statement true, nor add weight to it.

Now, I suggest you go and read this excellent book, and come back and say to us that the British Army hasn't only been defeated several times in it's history, but is being defeated now.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Losing-Small-Wa ... 321&sr=1-1

I have admit i have only read parts of his book Achtung Panzer but from the best of my knowledge Guderian writes a very concise and authoritative peace on the theory of armored warfare. Your mistake is to compare panzer leader and autobiographical work with that of a work of military history. It is obvious to me the chance of an autobiography being 100% accurate are slim but it is worth noting that allies decided that he had behaved as a professional soldier should throughout the war.

The army is not being defeated right now. As in Vietnam the public at large are preventing the army from doing what is needed to be done to win. At the time of withdrawal the aim of replacing the Taliban as the national government in Afghanistan will be complete. A good read on this are the later chapters of perilous glory by john france where he likens the war in Afghanistan to fighting a war with one arm tied behind ones back due to the public back home. We need a leader of thatchers resolve to change this prevailing attitude.

On the book Losing small wars, a quick Google of reviews has found many that are highly critical on some of the authors assertions about the army and its conduct during the war. His accusation British troops never left there bases for example is totally wrong, most troops do on a regular basis. I also don't believe he has any grasp at all of the objectives the army has in afghan an furthermore to declare a war lost before it is over is highly questionable. It sounds to me like it is a very good account of the failings of the army in the beginning of the occupation but is not an accurate refection when compared to the reasons we are pulling out and the objectives we set before entering.

[Napkiraly]

Not unreasonable at all though considering you pretty much just said "genocide is good get mad u people who arent morally disgusting XD"

How the fuck am I supposed to know your opinions are genuinely that shit?

It's nice to know that, funding regime = being responsible for genocide. My sig NEVER claimed to support genocide.

If you're giving money to a genocidal regime so they can continue being dicks, how does that make you at the least partially responsible? It's like saying a person giving another person a gun knowing that they're going to go on a shooting spree is not partially responsible when that shooting spree occurs.

[Alimprad]

this.

yes lets call it "Ding Dong Day" where people from communities and groups that she shit on all dress up as their favourite Wizard of Oz character and converge on the Ritz for a community sing-a-long

The only communities she " shit on" where communities of strikers, so if youll excuse me, im off to "shit on" some strikers.

[Souseiseki]

We gave him billions of pounds worth of weapons and vehicles and considered him one of our very best and most valuable friends, but don't you dare imply we have any responsibility for what happened with those weapons. Did I mention we knew exactly what was going on and what would be done with the weapons, and gave him them anyway because he was our friend? Again, A-OK.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I have no doubt supporting this genocidal dictator was the right thing to do for the country (except for the guys who were the victims of genocide, but ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh), but our hands are clean here.

It's nice to know that, funding regime = being responsible for genocide. My sig NEVER claimed to support genocide.

If you're giving money to a genocidal regime so they can continue being dicks, how does that make you at the least partially responsible? It's like saying a person giving another person a gun knowing that they're going to go on a shooting spree is not partially responsible when that shooting spree occurs.

And then you continue to give the guns while the shooting spree is happening, saying that giving him guns is the right thing to do, still maintaining you're scot free because you're not actually shooting them yourselves.

[Britannic Realms]

Did Thatcher go to these countries and murder people herself? No. Read the wording in my sig - "She did the right thing. Especially in Indonesia and Vietnam." The key words being 'she did', not anyone else, her. I'm indicating that her supporting the regimes was the right thing to do for this country.

Yes. So she fucking supported genocidal regimes and so do you. You support a genocidal regime, YOU ARE SUPPORTING A GENOCIDAL REGIME. YOU ARE SAYING A GENOCIDAL REGIME WAS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY. YOU ARE SAYING PROTECTING THE FUCKING KHMER ROUGE WAS A GOOD THING. And you have the fucking audacity to complain about people being disrespectful to the dead.

Did Hitler personally murder all the Jews? No. Do we give a fuck? Fuck no.

She gave them the weapons to use. When people tried to fucking end it she supported the people who were committing genocide.

Again, let me make this very fucking clear to you.

In the case of the genocidal dictator and the people having genocide committed against them, she took the side of the genocidal dictator. And you are saying not only was this right, it was good for the country. Do you need to be told why genocide is wrong? Do you need to be told why giving genocidal dictators weapons and protecting their regimes is wrong? Are you aware the definition of treason in many countries includes shelter and material support? That you don't personally have to do it to bear responsibility?

Did Thatcher personally hate these people and order their deaths? No.

I don't know her reasoning behind these decisions but she Prime Minister, which means that she had the country's best interests at heart.

[Chinese Regions]

bitch

[Alimprad]

You obviously haven't a clue what you've written have you?

I know exactly what I wrote. Let me condense it a little: not everywhere outside of London is as desolate as you make it out to be.

Could we have the names of this millions of places?

[Souseiseki]

Alright guys, it's fucking over. The Khmer Rouge goes down, tonight.

No. No. No. *Sends troops to train the Khmer Rouges troops and tries to keep you out*

What the fuck are you doing?!

I AM THE IRON LADY, WE ARE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY (DON'T YOU DARE BLAME ME FOR ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS)

Yes. So she fucking supported genocidal regimes and so do you. You support a genocidal regime, YOU ARE SUPPORTING A GENOCIDAL REGIME. YOU ARE SAYING A GENOCIDAL REGIME WAS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY. YOU ARE SAYING PROTECTING THE FUCKING KHMER ROUGE WAS A GOOD THING. And you have the fucking audacity to complain about people being disrespectful to the dead.

Did Hitler personally murder all the Jews? No. Do we give a fuck? Fuck no.

She gave them the weapons to use. When people tried to fucking end it she supported the people who were committing genocide.

Again, let me make this very fucking clear to you.

In the case of the genocidal dictator and the people having genocide committed against them, she took the side of the genocidal dictator. And you are saying not only was this right, it was good for the country. Do you need to be told why genocide is wrong? Do you need to be told why giving genocidal dictators weapons and protecting their regimes is wrong? Are you aware the definition of treason in many countries includes shelter and material support? That you don't personally have to do it to bear responsibility?

Did Thatcher personally hate these people and order their deaths? No.

I don't know her reasoning behind these decisions but she Prime Minister, which means that she had the country's best interests at heart.

Did she call the guy who was killing them one of Britians best and most valuable friends, and give him billions of pounds with which the genocide would be significantly harder if not impossible to commit? Yes.

What do you mean? You don't know her reasons for supporting a genocidal dictator so you're just going to make assumptions?

[Imperiatom]

Yes. So she fucking supported genocidal regimes and so do you. You support a genocidal regime, YOU ARE SUPPORTING A GENOCIDAL REGIME. YOU ARE SAYING A GENOCIDAL REGIME WAS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY. YOU ARE SAYING PROTECTING THE FUCKING KHMER ROUGE WAS A GOOD THING. And you have the fucking audacity to complain about people being disrespectful to the dead.

Did Hitler personally murder all the Jews? No. Do we give a fuck? Fuck no.

She gave them the weapons to use. When people tried to fucking end it she supported the people who were committing genocide.

Again, let me make this very fucking clear to you.

In the case of the genocidal dictator and the people having genocide committed against them, she took the side of the genocidal dictator. And you are saying not only was this right, it was good for the country. Do you need to be told why genocide is wrong? Do you need to be told why giving genocidal dictators weapons and protecting their regimes is wrong? Are you aware the definition of treason in many countries includes shelter and material support? That you don't personally have to do it to bear responsibility?

Did Thatcher personally hate these people and order their deaths? No.

I don't know her reasoning behind these decisions but she Prime Minister, which means that she had the country's best interests at heart.

As i said yesterday, she chose the side she thought was less dangerous to the west and was the least bad of the two sides. It must be noted at the time that the Kamer rouge was the recognized government of Cambodia by the UN.

[Napkiraly]

Yes. So she fucking supported genocidal regimes and so do you. You support a genocidal regime, YOU ARE SUPPORTING A GENOCIDAL REGIME. YOU ARE SAYING A GENOCIDAL REGIME WAS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY. YOU ARE SAYING PROTECTING THE FUCKING KHMER ROUGE WAS A GOOD THING. And you have the fucking audacity to complain about people being disrespectful to the dead.

Did Hitler personally murder all the Jews? No. Do we give a fuck? Fuck no.

She gave them the weapons to use. When people tried to fucking end it she supported the people who were committing genocide.

Again, let me make this very fucking clear to you.

In the case of the genocidal dictator and the people having genocide committed against them, she took the side of the genocidal dictator. And you are saying not only was this right, it was good for the country. Do you need to be told why genocide is wrong? Do you need to be told why giving genocidal dictators weapons and protecting their regimes is wrong? Are you aware the definition of treason in many countries includes shelter and material support? That you don't personally have to do it to bear responsibility?

I don't know her reasoning behind these decisions but she Prime Minister, which means that she had the country's best interests at heart.

This is not a valid excuse in being capable in crimes against humanity.

[Souseiseki]

Did Thatcher go to these countries and murder people herself? No. Read the wording in my sig - "She did the right thing. Especially in Indonesia and Vietnam." The key words being 'she did', not anyone else, her. I'm indicating that her supporting the regimes was the right thing to do for this country.

Because intellectuals, people that can read and everyone that isn't a farmer are such a threat to Britain, we should not only let an educated hypocritical politician wipe them all out but endorse and fund him as well?

At last, someone finally gets it! And give him weapons. And train his troops. But we bear no responsibility at all. Not even a smidgen.

[Chinese Regions]

Yes. So she fucking supported genocidal regimes and so do you. You support a genocidal regime, YOU ARE SUPPORTING A GENOCIDAL REGIME. YOU ARE SAYING A GENOCIDAL REGIME WAS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY. YOU ARE SAYING PROTECTING THE FUCKING KHMER ROUGE WAS A GOOD THING. And you have the fucking audacity to complain about people being disrespectful to the dead.

Did Hitler personally murder all the Jews? No. Do we give a fuck? Fuck no.

She gave them the weapons to use. When people tried to fucking end it she supported the people who were committing genocide.

Again, let me make this very fucking clear to you.

In the case of the genocidal dictator and the people having genocide committed against them, she took the side of the genocidal dictator. And you are saying not only was this right, it was good for the country. Do you need to be told why genocide is wrong? Do you need to be told why giving genocidal dictators weapons and protecting their regimes is wrong? Are you aware the definition of treason in many countries includes shelter and material support? That you don't personally have to do it to bear responsibility?

Did Thatcher personally hate these people and order their deaths? No.

I don't know her reasoning behind these decisions but she is the Prime Minister, which means that she had the country's best interests at heart.

Respect your language. Seriously? Not knowing why they did it does not justify their actions, she still supported dictatorial regimes, funded the militaries of those regimes.
Tony Blair didn't hate Iraqis either, but he supported and joined in with an American invasion ordered by George Bush (who doesn't personally hate Iraqis either). The words "But he/she/they didn't hate _____ personally" makes everything ok does it? Hitler didn't hate the British people, fellow Aryan Anglo-Saxons, he just thought bombing them were what's best for Germany.