Santerme

polla2256 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Please dont take this the wrong way as each person > is different and todays society seems somewhat > softer but take your son to martial arts or > boxing. > > Theres nothing wrong with the controled aggresion. > Also an idiot with a knife is an easy opponent if > you know how to disarm and disble them. I agree > with the take on the law of the jungle but > remember you need to know how to defend yourself > with skill and thought rather than windmilling and > throwing breeze blocks. > > At 6 on 3 In my teens Id have them running to > their mummies minus shoes and pants complete with > broken noses. I spent 23 years in the army, most of it attached to front line units and I am airborne qualified, also have passed through the US Army Ranger school...my brother is a twenty five year veteran of the Royal Marines Commando... About four or five years ago we intervened in Leicester Sq when three youths were assaulting a girl. I ended up with a substantial slash wound which required hospital attention and my brother with 12 stitches in a similar wound. For a phone, just let the buggers have it.

I think the Canadians have the best museum in Normandy....in the summer it is staffed by High School students who are bi lingual from all across Canada. Really worth a visit.

Nowhere near old enough to have a personal memory of the day.... I have been privileged to attend many of the reunions over the years and participated in the 60th anniversary drop. Met Richard Todd on a few occasions, who perversely starred in the Longest Day and was at the Bridge over the Orne on D Day as a member of 7th Parachute Battalion.

RIP

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I see it there are several different issues > here. > > 1. Are the parents at least partly to blame? IMO > Yes. When you have small kids you don't leave them > alone unless you're a moron, and it is neglect of > the worst kind. It is possible the child would > have been snatched at another time, but don't make > it bloody east FFS! > > 2. Should the parents be punished for it? They > have been in the worst possible way, they have > lost a daughter. > > 3. Is Sue like a dog with a bone? Yes > > 4. Does DJKQ love any opportunity to row with Sue? > Yes > > 5. Can either of them just rise above it and not > have the last word? Hell No! Neat summary

The only thing random about this was the victim, I suspect...it could have been almost anyone who had walked out of the barracks.. The motive was verbalised by the perp and far from random. RIP the gent who was brutally murdered...and condolences to his family and friends.

rgutsell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thank God thats over. > > Just think; at the drop of a hat, without > agreement from the state or its representatives, a > Private funeral (for that is what it was folks!) > was allocated about ?10 mill, substantial police > presence, devoted media attention, roads closed, > security "measures", threats from the police to > pre-emptively arrest sections of the population, > the involvement of the forces and the presence of > reps from other states. Not Argentina > though...that would have taken intelligence and > forgiveness. > > Thatchers family should have paid for it all. > > Meanwhile, the rest of us have to "Live with > austerity". > > It happened because a significant faction of > people, installed in Government and other > positions, wanted it, and assumed it would happen. > It was a demonstration of "class" and "party". It > shows (IMOP) that far from being reformed, > Government remains separatist and elitist. > > Ok, rant over. > > Now then, where will the statue to the nasty old > bird be put up? > > Yours > > Rgutsell We are now spiralling past boredom to the depths of ennui....

John '2 Coffins' Prescott

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rgutsell Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Hallo everyone > > I am very pleased that my thread has produced such > a fertile, creative, and entertaining response. > > My own family want me to shut up and stop > ranting! > > Glenda Jacksons speech was excellent and bravely > undertaken in isolation. What a stark contrast > herapproach is to that of Ms Thatcher et al. > Jackson for PM anyone? > > I think I will head for the Magdalene wed eve, and > metaphoricaly tip some beer over Thatchers grave. > > From MM: > > I personally will raise a glass in tribute to one > of the most effective post war Prime Ministers we > have seen. My first 10 adult years were between > 1970 and 1980. That grey, dismal and utterly > uninspiring decade was reversed under the > Conservative government that she led. Her > government made mistakes, not least in attempting > to downsize the Royal Navy at the height of the > Cold War, a decision that arguably contributed to > the Argentine invasion of the Faklands, but on the > whole the government she led got it about 75% > right - which is a pretty good outcome for > politicians. > > The personalisation of her period as PM, > attributing every decision (good or bad) to her > alone is ridiculous - while the continued > demonisation of her by the left is, to me, barely > understandable. Her government made decisions > that, in hindsight, almost every other politician > would have been forced to make given world > economic forces. The suggestion that without > Margaret Thatcher there would still be happy > northern communities of miners and steel workers, > gathering in their working men's clubs or around > their racing pigeon lofts and indulging in clog > dancing to colliery brass bands at weekends is > pure fantasy. In 1979 deep mined (ie UK > nationalised) coal was costing > ?130/ton to > produce while it was fetching ?35/ton on world > markets - an unsustainable commercial proposition. > I remember my first car - a rust bucket > (nationalised) British Leyland Maestro - I could > afford to buy it as a student because it was > worth, three years old, about 10% of its purchase > price due to rust and mechanical problems. That > was the reality that the incoming government was > faced with. > > Time is meant to lend perspective, the Thatcher is > Dead celebratory parties by those who were, in > general, far too young to have even lived under > her governments let alone been affected by them > are just weird. If those participating had an > ounce of gumption they would be making real > political points in today's political arena not > dancing around the effigy of a politician who last > wielded power in 1990. > > As for Glenda Jackson - her speech was more a > spiteful, shrewish and cowardly rant than a > considered political demolition of a, once upon a > time, opponent. Lord Howe's resignation speech in > 1990 was both a far more effective attack and also > far more brave as he didn't wait until Margaret > Thatcher had died. Eloquent MM, nicely said!

woodrot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Whats the difference between Hitler and Thatchers > tenure ? > > Hitler had the sense to top himself when his 12 > years as leader was up > > > ( see what I did there - a little bit of politics > - to liven things up a bit - off you go ) Larger yawn

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What part of "effectively stalemated" somehow > differs from "It could ahve gone on forever"? > > The IRA had been putting feelers out to the > security services for negotiations from the mid > eighties onwards, but it was Maggie who pooh > poohed them with her legendary 'convictions'. > > When Major came along he was keen for a new > approach from the off and gave the greenlight for > the security services to begin talks (metatalks > really, ie talks to begin talks); the city > bombings were done to strengthen a negotiating > position not force anyone to the table. > > I may be many annoying or unsavoury things MM, but > brainwashed or spoon-fed isn't one of them.. > > -- edit -- > > A bit of digging and I'm mistaken, it wasn't Major > on coming in to office, it was actually Thatch > herself prior to leaving!!! > http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/1999/oct/16/northerni > reland.thatcher > It seems just like to many other things, she saw > too much through the lens of the cold war, and > indirectly ew may have Gorbachev to thank for the > first shoots of peace in NI. > A weird world indeed. I did two tours of Northern Ireland in the eighties and was a Brigade Intelligence Officer on the latter.... There were always channels of communications open with every organisation during the Troubles Actually Thatcher never pooh poohed the efforts, she just refused to give them the oxygen of publicity and therefore show any weakening of the Govt position on negotiating with terrorists... The real world works behind closed doors. John Deverell had meaningful dialogue in the late 80's and intense discussions in 1990 on bringing about a peaceful solution to the conflict and I am sure Hal Ditmus would have done previously.

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why should should there be a minutes silence for > her. She did f**k all for football and thought all > fans were thugs and hooligans. She wasn't far wrong.

woodrot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So how is everyone enjoying Brtish History > revisionist week then ? Which version?

Yep, cue the hate fest! I quite liked her

polla2256 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @tallulah When you've been shot at, rpg'd, sniped, > motored and ied'd come back and please tell me you > truly understand human nature. When you have had a > bout of ptsd, served in every modern conflict of > the 21st century and are considered a veteran then > come back to me for discussion. I see the world > for what it is. I hope I don't meet this person > bacause if I ever feel threatened I react with an > instinct you may never understand. I have pulled > the trigger many times and know how it affects > people, yet im still a functioning member of > society. If its a mental problem he needs help, if > its drug related I have no sympathy. Take pity on > him all you want but he should not be on the > streets. If those are the criteria then I understand human nature too But I fail to understand the linkage