[QUOTE=carcarcargo;40220404]No they aren't, she very much did all of those things.
She also sold all the council houses making affordable rent near impossible now along with housing problems, along with selling off a load of our public sector stuff for short term gain.
Don't even get me started on how she had a retreating ship that was from a country that had already sent their desire to surrender sunk, she was not a noble person by any means.[/QUOTE]
They're all hideously false.
1. The miners, firstly the largest surge of unemployment came from the Labour government of the 60s. Secondly, there were huge subsidies going into the coal industry and it was completely inefficient. Thirdly, not [I]all[/I] the mines were shut - only the worst, most inefficient ones. The unions were to blame for insisting on huge pay and for constantly striking, it crippled the rest of British industry.
2. In 1974 she stopped free milk to school children over 7 because [B]they weren't drinking it[/B]. Children under that age continued to get it for free for it's nutritional value.
3. No she didn't ruin the country - 30% GDP per capita growth whilst she was in office, and vast growth since would say otherwise.
[B]Some[/B], not all, of the council houses were sold off - and to the people that lived in them, hence why it was called [B]the right to buy[/B]. 'Public sector stuff' - what like British Petroleum? Otherwise known as BP, the company that has prospered astronomically since it was sold off? Please tell me, is there such a company called British Lleyland anymore? If not, care to explain why?
The General Belgrano was going to attack British ships, it was sunk before it had the chance.
[quote]On 1 May 1982, Admiral Juan Lombardo ordered all Argentine naval units to seek out the British task force around the Falklands and launch a “massive attack” the following day. The Belgrano, which was outside the exclusion zone to the north, was ordered south. Lombardo’s signal was intercepted by British Intelligence. As a result Mrs Thatcher and her War Cabinet, meeting at Chequers the following day, agreed to a request from Admiral Sir Terence Lewin, the Chief of the Defence Staff, to alter the rules of engagement and allow an attack on the Belgrano outside the exclusion zone.[/quote]
why so much talk about violence? you forget the totally peaceful party in george square
[IMG]http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article1818985.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/Revellers-spray-a-bottle-of-champagne-as-they-celebrate-the-death-of-former-British-prime-minister-Margaret-Thatcher-at-1818985.jpg[/IMG]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbp3k3rYMs4[/url]
[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;40220350]as it turns out, that involves beating people to death and smashing windows with the weak justification "muh milk" and "muh mines" despite that fact that nearly everyone who's rioting wasn't actually alive during thatcher's britain and those who were should know better[/QUOTE]
This kind of reasoning, you weren't alive then, doesn't really work. Things carry over, sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly.
Here in the US, slavery has been over for well past 100 years, but the residual effects remain. It doesn't matter if you never owned slaves, or never were a slave, your daily life is affected because the country you live in is still affected.
I do agree that there is a portion of any population who like any excuse to riot, simply because they like to destroy things.
[QUOTE=geogzm;40220095]She was a cunt, but defiling other people's property to celebrate her death isn't right. Celebrate it all you want indoors, party if you like, but smashing shops is just going to make everybody look bad.[/QUOTE]
she was a cunt yeah, making this country is being a cunt
I think people are forgetting how bad it was before Thatcher too, the three day week for example, cutting the working week down to three days to save electricity
[QUOTE=matt.ant;40220771]I think people are forgetting how bad it was before Thatcher too, the three day week for example, cutting the working week down to three days to save electricity[/QUOTE]
or the masses of debt and unemployment labour had created, taking over any rates any tory party had created.
[QUOTE=matt.ant;40220771]I think people are forgetting how bad it was before Thatcher too, the three day week for example, cutting the working week down to three days to save electricity[/QUOTE]
Add to that the IMF bailout, the winter of discontent, inflation of up to 27% and the militant unions being dominant over British industry.
This is pathetic that anyone is celebrating the death of an old lady, the Margret Thatcher that got the country back on track realistically has been dead for years given how ill she'd been.
if she was so bad why did anyone vote for her?
[QUOTE=PassTheBong;40220867]if she was so bad why did anyone vote for her?[/QUOTE]
Reelected twice too.
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;40220757]This kind of reasoning, you weren't alive then, doesn't really work. Things carry over, sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly.
Here in the US, slavery has been over for well past 100 years, but the residual effects remain. It doesn't matter if you never owned slaves, or never were a slave, your daily life is affected because the country you live in is still affected.
I do agree that there is a portion of any population who like any excuse to riot, simply because they like to destroy things.[/QUOTE]
Comparing Thatcher to slavery is rather overkill, I think. Most of the negative effects of Thatcher's rule are pretty much long gone, and those that aren't are vastly over-exaggerated. Breaking windows and hurting police officers because someone closed the mines nearly 30 years ago is completely irrational, and even discussing them as though it was still relevant is a silly idea as well because the mining industry doesn't exist any more, and their closing doesn't have any direct effect on anyone any more; and I'd argue we're better off without them.
It would be like you complaining about the British razing Washington in 1814 - it happened way before you were born, any family that might have been affected are no longer feeling its effects, and it didn't really do that much damage in the grand scheme of things anyway. Slavery did. Thatcher didn't.
[QUOTE=Judas;40220330]not to generalize, but is there a reason the UK riots so much? :v:[/QUOTE]
We don't? This is the second riot I can remember happening in my entire life (and these are very very small-scale compared to the August riots of 2011)
[IMG]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/09/article-2306165-192FC140000005DC-94_634x686.jpg[/IMG]
It's a good cinema.
On my way to college this morning, a police car, two police suv's, and two white lorries with police stripes on them drove past. I was wondering what they were for, guess this explains it.
[QUOTE=Vasili;40220879]Reelected twice too.[/QUOTE]
Three times, 1979, 1983 and 1987
[QUOTE=smurfy;40220924]We don't? This is the second riot I can remember happening in my entire life (and these are very very small-scale compared to the August riots of 2011)[/QUOTE]
this isn't a fucking riot, about three people turned bins over and someone smashed a window.
[QUOTE=Vasili;40220879]Reelected twice too.[/QUOTE]
Well, Falklands war, and the seventies were shit as well, contrary to popular belief.
[QUOTE=butt2089;40220969]Three times, 1979, 1983 and 1987[/QUOTE]
I thought she was elected in 79 and then reelected twice?
What is it these days that makes people think they can act however the hell they like? Why is it that they can't just have their celebration in their back garden, or local pub, and keep the fuck out of anyone else's way?
Have your party, great, wonderful. Don't spray public property with your boring, repetitive "non-conformist" "down with authority" shit.
When Tony Blair dies I will be
Setting fire to things []
Spraying "The twat is dead" on public property, which other people walk past and have to experience []
Having a quiet beer in my room/lounge/pub, not involving anyone else [x]
Have your party, drink your alcohol and fuck off. Life goes on.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;40220404]
Don't even get me started on how she had a retreating ship that was from a country that had already sent their desire to surrender sunk, she was not a noble person by any means.[/QUOTE]
The ship was outside the exclusion zone but British intelligence intercepted an order sent to it to move south and attack the British, which is why Thatcher cleared the attack.
[quote] On May 1, 1982, Admiral Juan Lombardo ordered all Argentine naval units to seek out the British task force around the Falklands and launch a “massive attack” the following day. The Belgrano, which was outside the exclusion zone to the north, was ordered south. Lombardo’s signal was intercepted by British Intelligence. As a result Mrs Thatcher and her War Cabinet, meeting at Chequers the following day, agreed to a request from Admiral Sir Terence Lewin, the Chief of the Defence Staff, to alter the rules of engagement and allow an attack on the Belgrano outside the exclusion zone.[/quote]
Oh carcarcargo.
Never change man
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;40220404]No they aren't, she very much did all of those things.
She also sold all the council houses making affordable rent near impossible now along with housing problems, along with selling off a load of our public sector stuff for short term gain.
Don't even get me started on how she had a retreating ship that was from a country that had already sent their desire to surrender sunk, she was not a noble person by any means.[/QUOTE]
She stopped providing milk to older students because studies had shown that they didn't drink it - it was a waste of money, that doesn't really sound like some evil act to me.
She allowed people to buy their council houses, she privatised a FAILING public sector that was drowning the country in debt - you can't deny that the British economy was hugely improved after this.
I find this funny, seeing as many people in the US were criticized for celebrating Osama's death. From what I've seen, Thatcher wasn't even half the monster she's been made out to me and (help me) [I]may have actually helped the country get back on it's feet.[/I]
I apologize if this is ignorant of me in some way, none of what she's done has been a part of my lifetime, and up until now I hadn't heard of her. It's just that I honestly expect better in the UK.
[QUOTE='[LOA] SonofBrim;40221376']I find this funny, seeing as many people in the US were criticized for celebrating Osama's death.[/QUOTE]
And so they should be, more so than this.
There is a difference between morbid celebration on the death of the most infamous politician in living memory and jingoistic celebrations of state sanctioned extrajudicial killings.
What kind of a barbarian celebrates a death like that anyway
I like how in the other thread everybody who was talking about how horrible she was got tons of good ratings, and this thread is basically the polar opposite
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;40221443]What kind of a barbarian celebrates a death like that anyway[/QUOTE]
this kind
[IMG]http://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/650x68.jpg?w=650[/IMG]
I don't care how much you hate her, celebrating her death is sick
what's even worse is most of these people weren't even around during her time as PM, they have no fucking clue what she did
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;40221443]What kind of a barbarian celebrates a death like that anyway[/QUOTE]
The Scots.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.