The James McClean Sponsored Poppy Thread

[vikingTON]

Fucking hell...

So the IRA weren't, and more recentIy the Islamic Extremists aren't credible threats? 

Don't respond this time though. It's pretty apparent this is all another one of your trolling efforts and should be completely disregarded.

To the British state? No, not even remotely. There's absolutely no reason why the army would need to deal with Republican or any other form of terrorist threat: that's why we have specialised police and intelligence agencies.

It's hardly surprising to see a moron like yourself try to equate credible threats like Nazi Germany with such two-bob outfits, in order to justify an unthinking, cretinous fetish for "oor boys in uniform" though.

[vikingTON]

Jesus wept...

So the IRA, who according to you weren't a credible threat despite on numerous occasions showing their ability to cause death and injury on a large scale weren't a threat to the British state?

I don't remember any specialised police or intelligence agencies turning up to defuse their bombs either. 

No, because their terrorist attacks - like almost all terrorist attacks - did absolutely no damage whatsoever to the British state. Look up what a "state" means. And the British police and intelligence services have in fact undertaken the vast majority of the work countering any terrorist threats against the UK for the past forty years; you're clearly too thick to understand how "counter-terrorism" works too.

The only threat to the British state since its creation has been the rise of a dominant state on the European continent, which hasn't been a credible outcome since 1945. Which is why the British state pays a relatively small mercenary force to pursue arcane foreign policy interests in shitholes like the Middle East and the Falklands, rather than conscripting civilians to defend against an invasion over the Channel.

Thanks for playing anyway, chump.

[Bobby Skidmarks]

You got a wee pat on the bum fi oor Bobby though.[emoji106]

*inhales sharply through teeth*

[Bobby Skidmarks]

I gave you a pity greenie for that, because that's all you have.

[LinkinFighter]

The shit flicker[emoji38]

[invergowrie arab]

28 minutes ago, 8MileBU said:

 

So almost successfully blowing up senior members of state isn't a threat to the state?

 

 

Well, no.. it's not.

[Njord]

 

 

Right, finally could be arsed to look for it.

 

The UK has declared War 5 times, the last was v Hitler.

 

Everycunt signing up since 1945 voluntarily is a cawk, wanting to play sodjer.

 

When the last WW2 veteran dies, end the Poppy appeal, only tossers benefit.

 

 

And even then , the 1914-18 heroes had a good number that ended up Tans, and they do NOT deserve to be remembered.

[1320Lichtie]

Fucking hell...

So the IRA weren't, and more recentIy the Islamic Extremists aren't credible threats? 

Don't respond this time though. It's pretty apparent this is all another one of your trolling efforts and should be completely disregarded.

It's not trolling

And it's funny how the West/US/Britain played a part in why they 2 threats were formed in the first place

[Ya Bezzer!]

Hundreds of thousands of men from these islands died in their droves so Raheem Sterling could get a six figure endorsement deal with Beats headphones.  It's absolutely disgraceful that football can't honour these...oh wait....no....it has absolutely nothing to do with football has it?

Sorry, my mistake.

[dogmc]

It's not trolling

And it's funny how the West/US/Britain played a part in why they 2 threats were formed in the first place

Not to mention funding training and arming one.....

[Redstarstranraer]

14 hours ago, renton said:

For all the strategic necesssity of defending the low countries, the cost ended up out of all proportion to the gains. You can look at social attitudes of the time, the frustration stemming from a lack of change in society, the lack of what might be termed the 'fruits of victory', the rise in socialism at this time, the eventual toppling of Haig's reputation after his death in '27, the Oxford debates, a decade of prime ministers who couldn't find a mandate to re-arm in the face of facism, these are hardly the signs of a society that looked upon the '14-18 conflict with any kind of, if not fondness, then at least accomplishment.

 

1 hour ago, dorlomin said:

So no actual proof that most British people thought the Great War had been futile. Just waffle about Haig's reputation. 

 

There are actually a number of substantive points in what renton wrote there which are as near to 'proof' as you are going to get on a football forum of the negative attitude towards the First World War that the majority of the British populace took in the 20s-30s (and indeed even after the Second World War).  There is certainly a lot more there than 'waffle' about Haig's reputation.  

It is a widely-accepted historical fact that between the wars a very large section of the British population, most likely a majority, were entirely cynical about the motivation, conduct and outcome of the Great War.  Their criticism went well beyond questions of Haig's personal competence.  The pacifists who opposed intervention in the Spanish Civil War for example or allowing Mussolini to occupy Albania and Abyssinia weren't the lone voices crying in the wilderness; it was the more what we would term today 'hawkish' politicians who advocated a military confrontation with the fascist regimes (or even just increasing defence spending domestically) who were on the political fringe for almost two decades.  The very fact we embarked upon a policy of appeasement speaks to the entrenched anti-militarism of the interbellum period.

In terms of historiography a fairly negative view of the First World War probably does emerge more consistently from the 50s onwards (but amongst historians, it should be pointed out, generally old enough to have developed their attitudes in that inter-war period) but it is clearly evidenced culturally well before that. Indeed this negative view which I suppose can be summed up as that the political and strategic imperatives that impelled Britain to fight the Great War were not worth the tremendous human sacrifice that it cost us has been the dominant view for decades.  It is only relatively recently historical dillettantes like Dan Snow have been foisting their views on the public to try and convince us that it was both 'all worthwhile' and 'actually not that bad'.

 

[Venti]

I want a jobby emoji on everything 8MileBU wears.

[jagfox]

32 minutes ago, Slenderman said:

I want a jobby emoji on everything 8MileBU wears.

A Ploppy?

#Respect

[jagfox]

Next weeks game should be dubbed 'The Poppy Bowl'.

The losing nation has to actually look after the sad cases of service men killed, maimed or traumatised for that year.

[Bully Wee Villa]

The losing manager (Strachan) should be sent to Syria to support the troops.

[Jamaldo]

The losing manager (Strachan) should be sent to Syria to support the troops.

That should happen even if we win.

[Cerberus]

The losing manager (Strachan) should be sent to Syria to support the troops.

His tactics should be given to ISIS.

[Stellaboz]

Oliver Burke wouldn't even be given a balaclava.

[vikingTON]

So almost successfully blowing up senior members of state isn't a threat to the state?

Ok then....

Stupid c**t.

Well no it wasn't. In the same way that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't "a threat to the U.S. state" for successfully assassinating its President. Last time I checked, the United States rolled on much as it did before and certainly didn't send in the army for a decades-long occupation of downtown Dallas.

Swing and a miss once again, you utter simpleton.

[GordonD]

19 minutes ago, vikingTON said:

Well no it wasn't. In the same way that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't "a threat to the U.S. state" for successfully assassinating its President. Last time I checked, the United States rolled on much as it did before and certainly didn't send in the army for a decades-long occupation of downtown Dallas.

No, they sent them to Vietnam instead. Which Kennedy wouldn't have done.