Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Margaret Thatcher was she really that bad?

Options
1…34689…13

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    I've no doubt Maggie loved the whole thing, just as she did the Iranian embassy siege. Apparently she became a bit obsessed with the SAS after that.

    I don't think any other leader would have done anything much different though, not if they valued their position.


  • Options
    #153
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users Posts: 24,015 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Biggins wrote: »
    Well if they had, if any country had in a similar situation or in any war, millions alone would have been saved with the non-use of weapons - besides the saving of any further possible lives.
    But as there was no even attempted serious talks, that didn't happen either.

    There was no way that the Junta was going to have a quiet chat about the situation. They were as intransigent as Maggie. Both Maggie and the Junta wanted to hang on to their respective power, and both sides realised that their power would be gone if their side lost.

    I understand that the Argentinians intended to ship thousands of new residents to the islands so that they could vote on the sovereignty issue, but that never happened because they got kicked off.

    Given the Junta's record for making people disappear, I wouldn't have been at all surprised had the British residents disappeared, to be later dumped out of planes over the South Atlantic like many Argentinian dissenters had been previously. If anyone considers the British to be bad, the Junta at that time was 100 times worse, their record on human rights was appalling. I think most of the conscripts were expendable illiterate peasants, and the Junta didn't really give a toss about what happened to them.


  • Options
    #154
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    There was no way that the Junta was going to have a quiet chat about the situation. They were as intransigent as Maggie. Both Maggie and the Junta wanted to hang on to their respective power, and both sides realised that their power would be gone if their side lost.

    I understand that the Argentinians intended to ship thousands of new residents to the islands so that they could vote on the sovereignty issue, but that never happened because they got kicked off.

    Given the Junta's record for making people disappear, I wouldn't have been at all surprised had the British residents disappeared, to be later dumped out of planes over the South Atlantic like many Argentinian dissenters had been previously. If anyone considers the British to be bad, the Junta at that time was 100 times worse, their record on human rights was appalling. I think most of the conscripts were expendable illiterate peasants, and the Junta didn't really give a toss about what happened to them.

    O' no argument about the Junta.
    Sadly the top people I think got away a great deal with their crimes, while the lower cannon-fodder once again paid the price of their orders.


  • Options
    #155
    BarackPyjama
    Closed Accounts Posts: 974 ✭✭✭BarackPyjama


    Empathy and understanding are two good qualities for the leader of a powerful country to have. She didn't have them. Regardless of what you think of her specific policies, she was a horrid c**t of an individual.

    Then again, we're not known to vote for decent people in this country either so it's hardly surprising that people are championing her on this thread.


  • Options
    #156
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users Posts: 24,015 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Biggins wrote: »
    O' no argument about the Junta.
    Sadly the top people I think got away a great deal with their crimes, while the lower cannon-fodder once again paid the price of their orders.

    Standard procedure.:(


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    john reilly
    Closed Accounts Posts: 409 ✭✭john reilly


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    There was no way that the Junta was going to have a quiet chat about the situation. They were as intransigent as Maggie. Both Maggie and the Junta wanted to hang on to their respective power, and both sides realised that their power would be gone if their side lost.

    I understand that the Argentinians intended to ship thousands of new residents to the islands so that they could vote on the sovereignty issue, but that never happened because they got kicked off.

    Given the Junta's record for making people disappear, I wouldn't have been at all surprised had the British residents disappeared, to be later dumped out of planes over the South Atlantic like many Argentinian dissenters had been previously. If anyone considers the British to be bad, the Junta at that time was 100 times worse, their record on human rights was appalling. I think most of the conscripts were expendable illiterate peasants, and the Junta didn't really give a toss about what happened to them.
    sounds a bit like her majestys finest. ppacked off to norn ireland. argentina, afghanistan etc.


  • Options
    #158
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users Posts: 24,015 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    john reilly wrote: »
    sounds a bit like her majestys finest. ppacked off to norn ireland. argentina, afghanistan etc.

    There's no need to hold back, get it off your chest.


  • Options
    #159
    nxbyveromdwjpg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,402 ✭✭✭nxbyveromdwjpg


    Zaph wrote: »
    I think you'll find the miners would disagree with you. And the steelworkers. And those who worked in what was left of the British motor industry

    And why should the government have continued to artificially prop-up a loss making, inefficient and outdated industry?

    Do you think it would have been better for the UK at that time to continue be held to random by unions that went on strike every 5 minutes if the government money being pumped into them to keep the whole sham together was threatened?

    Bollocks. Its unfortunate that miners industry fell apart, but it did, and not due to one politician but because it was out priced and it's time had come.. From then on it was a massive drain on the taxpayer... the plug needed to be pulled and she pulled it.

    Wouldn't mind but half the people here harking on about that are probably the same ones that hark on about public sector pay or any number or comparable things going on in the daily-moans here now.

    Ireland could most definitely use a leader with her strength and conviction.


  • Options
    #160
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    nm wrote: »
    And why should the government have continued to artificially prop-up a loss making, inefficient and outdated industry?

    ............

    There were far more constructive ways to deal with the problem.


  • Options
    #161
    Yeah Yeah Yeah
    Closed Accounts Posts: 405 ✭✭Yeah Yeah Yeah


    The woman/thing was much worse than bad. Psycho.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    I've no doubt Maggie loved the whole thing, just as she did the Iranian embassy siege. Apparently she became a bit obsessed with the SAS after that.

    I don't think any other leader would have done anything much different though, not if they valued their position.

    Was watching a BBC piece about the Falklands and the misguided nationalism and jingoism struck me. If it wasn't for the war so many who lapped all that up, would have been unemployed and big opponents of her.

    Interesting back story was Blair fought his first election during the war, he was trounced, might even have lost his deposit. Fought it on an anti-war platform.

    His lesson was wars can come in very handy and anti war protests, well meaning as they are, don't win elections, as we all know!

    In an Irish context, Haughey's strident oppostion to the war didn't help him to build up a special relationship!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #163
    BOHtox
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭BOHtox


    forfuxsake wrote: »
    Labour repaid more debt than Thatcher.

    http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2011/05/14/labour-repaid-much-more-debt-than-thatcher/

    There would never have been peace under Thatcher and her contribution was nil. She recruited more into the IRA than they ever could have.

    The problem with capitalism is that you use other people's money to pay off huge bank debts.

    She made hundreds of thousands of people unemployed and then attacked them for being unemployed.

    She was a terrible mother and a horrible person and even her own party realised this.

    She not only treated the working class people of England with disdain but also her own colleagues and her children.


    Ignorance is bliss. A true capitalistic government would have let the toxic banks collapse and leave the good aspects of good banks to be bought by a new company who would observe the errors of the past and not re-make them!


  • Options
    #164
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    nm wrote: »
    Zaph wrote: »
    I think you'll find the miners would disagree with you. And the steelworkers. And those who worked in what was left of the British motor industry

    And why should the government have continued to artificially prop-up a loss making, inefficient and outdated industry?

    Do you think it would have been better for the UK at that time to continue be held to random by unions that went on strike every 5 minutes if the government money being pumped into them to keep the whole sham together was threatened?

    Bollocks. Its unfortunate that miners industry fell apart, but it did, and not due to one politician but because it was out priced and it's time had come.. From then on it was a massive drain on the taxpayer... the plug needed to be pulled and she pulled it.

    Wouldn't mind but half the people here harking on about that are probably the same ones that hark on about public sector pay or any number or comparable things going on in the daily-moans here now.

    Ireland could most definitely use a leader with her strength and conviction.

    As a British person i am a firm supporter of what Thatcher did for Britain. She was one of the greatest leaders of our time. She made some mistakes towards the end but her overall contribution to the success of Great Britain was significant. I for one will be saddened when she dies, as I respect and admire her. Maybe you should read her official biography before making derogatory comments about such a great leader.


  • Options
    #165
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    BOHtox wrote: »
    Ignorance is bliss. A true capitalistic government would have let the toxic banks collapse and leave the good aspects of good banks to be bought by a new company who would observe the errors of the past and not re-make them!

    Would you need a Capitalist Government in a truly Capitalist society? Why would we? Sure there'd be no problems for Government to govern?

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #166
    Jimoslimos
    Registered Users Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    BOHtox wrote: »
    Ignorance is bliss. A true capitalistic government would have let the toxic banks collapse and leave the good aspects of good banks to be bought by a new company who would observe the errors of the past and not re-make them!
    Ah, the no true Scotsman argument.


  • Options
    #167
    BOHtox
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭BOHtox


    K-9 wrote: »
    Would you need a Capitalist Government in a truly Capitalist society? Why would we? Sure there'd be no problems for Government to govern?

    For services such as the Police, Fire, mountain rescue, infrastructure and a few more things. You'd need a government to stop anarchy but you wouldn't need income tax.


  • Options
    #168
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    As a British person i am a firm supporter of what Thatcher did for Britain. She was one of the greatest leaders of our time. She made some mistakes towards the end ...............

    "towards the end"?

    Lifted arms embargo on Pinochet in 1980...always refused to enact sanctions against apartheid SA and termed the ANC terrorists...the whole mine thing was mishandled from the get-go.....


  • Options
    #169
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Nodin wrote: »
    Deleted User wrote: »
    As a British person i am a firm supporter of what Thatcher did for Britain. She was one of the greatest leaders of our time. She made some mistakes towards the end ...............

    "towards the end"?

    Lifted arms embargo on Pinochet in 1980...always refused to enact sanctions against apartheid SA and termed the ANC terrorists...the whole mine thing was mishandled from the get-go.....

    One of the biggest mistakes was the management of the Poll Tax. It was really what marked her downfall.


  • Options
    #170
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    BOHtox wrote: »
    For services such as the Police, Fire, mountain rescue, infrastructure and a few more things. You'd need a government to stop anarchy but you wouldn't need income tax.

    So what taxes are okay to pay for those services?

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #171
    BOHtox
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭BOHtox


    K-9 wrote: »
    So what taxes are okay to pay for those services?


    Well I mean there's a lot of taxes currently. Income tax only makes up about a third of taxation income for the government. There's still 2/3 of the income there. I'm sure you know what they are being a mod of the politics forum and all...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    BOHtox wrote: »
    Well I mean there's a lot of taxes currently. Income tax only makes up about a third of taxation income for the government. There's still 2/3 of the income there. I'm sure you know what they are being a mod of the politics forum and all...

    So tax is okay? Fine.

    Wouldn't be VAT, wouldn't be Capital Acquisitions tax, wouldn't be PRSI, definitely not PAYE as you said.

    Only thing I can think of is you are in favour of a local services charge.

    You would hate to see the poor guy whose house was let to burn down because he had no insurance, whereas the neighbours got the fire brigade, as far as I can tell. A Capitalist that sees failings in the free market, I like it.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #173
    BOHtox
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭BOHtox


    K-9 wrote: »
    So tax is okay? Fine.

    Wouldn't be VAT, wouldn't be Capital Acquisitions tax, wouldn't be PRSI, definitely not PAYE as you said.

    Only thing I can think of is you are in favour of a local services charge.

    You would hate to see the poor guy whose house was let to burn down because he had no insurance, whereas the neighbours got the fire brigade, as far as I can tell. A Capitalist that sees failings in the free market, I like it.

    I never said tax wasn't okay. The government needs money and it gets it by tax. There would be VAT etc.

    I would say to the poor guy, when the government stops stealing 41% of his money or 20% as the case may be, to use that to get insurance. If you can't, I'd say prioritise. Give up smoking, drinking etc and pay for it that way. When regulations are cut and jobs can be created more easily, I reckon his wage would increase anyway. Besides, would you expect the government to pay for him? Should they steal my money by PAYE and give it to this guy who chose not to get it?


  • Options
    #174
    RichieC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭RichieC


    Deleted User wrote: »
    One of the biggest mistakes was the management of the Poll Tax. It was really what marked her downfall.

    Yea fk the arms embargo. people were taxed!


  • Options
    #175
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    BOHtox wrote: »
    I never said tax wasn't okay. The government needs money and it gets it by tax. There would be VAT etc.

    I would say to the poor guy, when the government stops stealing 41% of his money or 20% as the case may be, to use that to get insurance. If you can't, I'd say prioritise. Give up smoking, drinking etc and pay for it that way. When regulations are cut and jobs can be created more easily, I reckon his wage would increase anyway. Besides, would you expect the government to pay for him? Should they steal my money by PAYE and give it to this guy who chose not to get it?

    Yeah, but we aren't talking about the current system, we are talking about this Capitalist Utopian society.

    So why is VAT okay, a tax on spending, whereas a tax on income is theft?

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #176
    BOHtox
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭BOHtox


    K-9 wrote: »
    Yeah, but we aren't talking about the current system, we are talking about this Capitalist Utopian society.

    So why is VAT okay, a tax on spending, whereas a tax on income is theft?

    Taxing consumption is completely different to taxing income. People never see the money that's stolen from them but they spend their money on items and pay VAT on the good or service.
    PAYE is a disincentive to work. VAT isn't.


  • Options
    #177
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    BOHtox wrote: »
    Taxing consumption is completely different to taxing income. People never see the money that's stolen from them but they spend their money on items and pay VAT on the good or service.
    PAYE is a disincentive to work. VAT isn't.

    VAT is a disincentive to spending as PAYE is a disincentive to work.

    Interesting, VAT is a lesser evil than PAYE.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #178
    CiaranC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭CiaranC


    BOHtox wrote: »
    For services such as the Police, Fire, mountain rescue, infrastructure and a few more things
    So socialism for the stuff you want, but not for the things you dont. Brilliant! You better hurry over to Politics and join the other four libertarians in their quest for world domination


  • Options
    #179
    wendell borton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,336 ✭✭✭wendell borton


    Biggins wrote: »
    http://www.isthatcherdeadyet.co.uk/
    (Unitedpeople Ireland and 78,718 others like this.)

    'Nuff said!

    +1. Hated by the daily mail.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1323596/Margaret-Thatcher-death-website-condemned-vulgar.html


  • Options
    #180
    jimthemental
    Registered Users Posts: 2,004 ✭✭✭jimthemental


    Just went on After hours and saw Thatcher referred to in the past tense. Dammit man you can't go getting someones hopes up like that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    NinjaK
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 963 ✭✭✭NinjaK


    What a strange thread title in an Irish forum, imagine 'Albert Reynolds was he really that bad?' in an English forum?


Advertisement