thisal Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 24 minutes ago, Wee Willie said: I always put 'Scotland First' while you're too busy standing up for the downtrodden anywhere outside Scotland where you (and I) have nae say in the matter. Is that being small minded and myopic? Yes. In fact as you wrote it out and still can't see it. I'd say blind. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 19 minutes ago, thisal said: Chamberlain is very hard done to. There's a very strong case that the "piece of paper" allowed Britain to win the the Battle of Britain. As Britain wasn't ready for war in 1938 and if we had gone to war then Germany would have still taken Europe, but would also have had air superiority and would have been able to invade Britain. Britain went on a catch up in the arms race after Munich. ...and he didn't bottle it over the Danzig corridor once it had become abundantly clear to all that Hitler's word (with the full annexation of what is now the Czech Republic) couldn't be trusted. The Sudeten Germans had a reasonable case from a Wilsonian self-determination sort of standpoint as there was a double standard on how boundaries had been drawn after the Treaty of Versailles, so the exact grounds for fighting a war over that and getting the population fully behind it in a western democracy like the UK or France would have been tricky to say the least. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 6 minutes ago, thisal said: Yes. In fact as you wrote it out and still can't see it. I'd say blind. ...and you're obtuse 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 25 minutes ago, thisal said: Chamberlain is very hard done to. There's a very strong case that the "piece of paper" allowed Britain to win the the Battle of Britain. As Britain wasn't ready for war in 1938 and if we had gone to war then Germany would have still taken Europe, but would also have had air superiority and would have been able to invade Britain. Britain went on a catch up in the arms race after Munich. Surely the 'phony war' helped a wee bit? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooky Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Chamberlain is very hard done to. There's a very strong case that the "piece of paper" allowed Britain to win the the Battle of Britain. As Britain wasn't ready for war in 1938 and if we had gone to war then Germany would have still taken Europe, but would also have had air superiority and would have been able to invade Britain. Britain went on a catch up in the arms race after Munich. Also, the public had absolutely no desire for war and Chamberlain attempted to ensure that was the case. Of course it ended in failure, but I do think he gets an unnecessarily harsh reputation.And on the other event, I see Bercow has gone back to his favourite pastime of pissing off Tories. Always find it funny that it's members of his former party who hate him that most, I don't know if this goes back to the old rumours that he very nearly defected to Labour when he was a normal MP.I agree with him 100% though, Trump shouldn't be allowed to address parliament. Bercow is prone to loving his own voice quite often, but I think he's done a good job as Speaker. Shunned many of the traditions (first Speaker to not wear a wig, I think) and has been on a mission to ensure that backbenchers are always given as much time as possible and that ministers are always around for urgent questions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya Bezzer! Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 13 hours ago, RedRob72 said: Isn't the Speaker supposed to be completely neutral and independent, steering clear of personal political comment? I've no time for Trump, but Bercow has clearly stepped beyond his remit, role and position in the house. A very self-important man indeed! He certainly did offer a warm welcome to the Chinese Premier at WM. I agree that Bercow has been out of turn in his comments but Trump should never have been invited to a state visit in the first place. Ultimately this falls on Theresa May's lap. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 I agree that Bercow has been out of turn in his comments but Trump should never have been invited to a state visit in the first place. Ultimately this falls on Theresa May's lap. Whether we like it or not he's got a four year term. After already opting to leave the EU, do we then push away and disengage with another very important strategic economic partner because we don't like the guy at the helm. Again TM (as with the EU) is between a rock and a hard place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya Bezzer! Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Just now, RedRob72 said: Whether we like it or not he's got a four year term. After already opting to leave the EU, do we then push away and disengage with another very important strategic economic partner because we don't like the guy at the helm. Again TM (as with the EU) is between a rock and a hard place. Surely a 'wait and see' policy would have been the most prudent policy as regards Trump? State visits are not compulsory and it's almost unprecedented to grant one for a new president. As for US policy towards the UK, it's not going to do us any favours if we woo Trump and then he's impeached or loses the next election - both are surely distinct possibilities. In any case economic discussions at government level do not require a state visit. It's simply worrying decision making, much like the attempt to circumnavigate Parliament. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Surely a 'wait and see' policy would have been the most prudent policy as regards Trump? State visits are not compulsory and it's almost unprecedented to grant one for a new president. As for US policy towards the UK, it's not going to do us any favours if we woo Trump and then he's impeached or loses the next election - both are surely distinct possibilities. In any case economic discussions at government level do not require a state visit. It's simply worrying decision making, much like the attempt to circumnavigate Parliament. Perhaps in response to Obama's view that the UK would be at the back of the Queue on leaving the EU. Maybe the Gov saw an opportunity to nudge in near the front, after Trumps unexpected victory back in Nov? If Trump carries out his promise to concentrate his efforts on American generated business and production, the competition and jockeying for position in a shrinking US import market may become increasingly important? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Whether we like it or not he's got a four year term. After already opting to leave the EU, do we then push away and disengage with another very important strategic economic partner because we don't like the guy at the helm. Again TM (as with the EU) is between a rock and a hard place. That's all well and good but she could have held off playing the state visit Trump card until we knew if he was going to settle down or if he was going to treat his presidency like another reality show. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 3 hours ago, RiG said: Some truly bizarre claims by Trump that the media under reported terrorist attacks like the one in Paris https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/07/white-house-list-donald-trumps-undereported-terror-list-paris-attacks-berlin-truck-killings You can tell were he starts going off script around 0:20 in the video until around 0:35 to get his wee "dishonest press" jibe in because he's no longer having to look at his speech. That's pretty bonkers. Exceptionally bonkers, even. His staff must hide behind the couch every time he gets in front of a camera. Pretty funny though. At what stage does he forget about this sort of nonsense and get bogged down in being President? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 7 minutes ago, Paco said: That's pretty bonkers. Exceptionally bonkers, even. His staff must hide behind the couch every time he gets in front of a camera. Pretty funny though. At what stage does he forget about this sort of nonsense and get bogged down in being President? The guy is a fucking crackpot. People who argue that it's a deliberate style aimed at undermining his opponents are equally deranged. The idea that the media in Europe is under reporting terrorist attacks is up there with the craziest comments he has uttered. We really need the saner voices amongst European Governments to respond to this kind on nonsense in the bluntest fashion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 'N Yellow Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 41 minutes ago, RedRob72 said: Perhaps in response to Obama's view that the UK would be at the back of the Queue on leaving the EU. Maybe the Gov saw an opportunity to nudge in near the front, after Trumps unexpected victory back in Nov? If Trump carries out his promise to concentrate his efforts on American generated business and production, the competition and jockeying for position in a shrinking US import market may become increasingly important? I think this is it , securing a deal with the US would be pretty significant. We leave the EU in a couple months and I imagine the government seen an opportunity to quickly jump in at the head of the queue, probably hoping we get something sorted before he's thrown out the White House tbh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLIEA Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 49 minutes ago, Paco said: That's pretty bonkers. Exceptionally bonkers, even. His staff must hide behind the couch every time he gets in front of a camera. Pretty funny though. At what stage does he forget about this sort of nonsense and get bogged down in being President? Not so sure his staff will take exception. He seems to have appointed crazies all over the place. He seems to be running the country as he did his business, surrounded by his children and other sycophants, no regard for honesty and integrity , still no tax returns? Just blusters and make things up. Totally unsuited to be POTUS and the sooner he is gone the better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 7 minutes ago, Red 'N Yellow said: I think this is it , securing a deal with the US would be pretty significant. We leave the EU in a couple months and I imagine the government seen an opportunity to quickly jump in at the head of the queue, probably hoping we get something sorted before he's thrown out the White House tbh. We MIGHT begin the process of leaving the EU in a couple of months. A trade deal with the US would be a disaster for normal British people. They can keep their shite food, private medical companies and nutjob presidents as far as I'm concerned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Bercow probably couldn't be arsed listening to Trump ramble on about FAKE NEWS and how he's totally best buds with the house and vetoed it on that principle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 'N Yellow Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 18 minutes ago, AUFC90 said: We MIGHT begin the process of leaving the EU in a couple of months. A trade deal with the US would be a disaster for normal British people. They can keep their shite food, private medical companies and nutjob presidents as far as I'm concerned. The American Dream 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerberus Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 2 hours ago, AUFC90 said: We MIGHT begin the process of leaving the EU in a couple of months. A trade deal with the US would be a disaster for normal British people. They can keep their shite food, private medical companies and nutjob presidents as far as I'm concerned. The UK already trades with the US. But apart from that, good point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 16 hours ago, WaffenThinMint said: Yep, because that was such a bloody rip roaring success last time around. I have always regarded it as ironic that the west couldn't wait to jump all over South Africa, Iran, Libya, Cuba, etc every chance they got, but turned a blind eye even after the Communist bloc imploded to China where those who offend the regime are executed on trumped up charges if someone with good connections is in need of a new kidney, heart, lungs, etc. Ach, you can't blame him for that... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 The UK already trades with the US. But apart from that, good point. I think he means the price we'd have to pay to improve the deal we already have as a member of the EU. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.