Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Maggie Thatcher death discussion thread - Mod rules in first post

1…4849515354…59

Comments

  • #1502
    Rascasse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭Rascasse


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Her primary concern was trade links and the flow of African resources gold platinum etc.
    She knew that bankrupting the country would solve nothing. In fact it would have been devastating for all the peoples of South Africa. Do you think the Botha would have just waved a white flag and said 'you guys are right, sorry about that'. History tells us probably not.
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    She sanctioned Mugabe's knighthood even after a massacre of some 20,000 tribesmen.
    Unlikely as he was given it in 1994.
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    She only bitterly agreed to sanctions after the US congress imposed them despite her 'mate' Reagan's attempt to veto them.
    The commonwealth passed sanctions before the Americans. The sanctions the commonwealth did pass were actually less restrictive than those that some of the commonwealth nations had already implemented, so they were lifted to match the less restrictive rules.
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Again, just like N.I. her own stubborn and ego driven beliefs led to deaths and violence that may not have happened had she succumbed to the inevitability of doing 'the right thing'
    So you are blaming Thatcher for the violence in South Africa? What about the governments in the 30 years before her? Much of the worst violence occurred in the 60's and 70's.

    The 'Thatcher supported apartheid' line is nonsense. Left wing propaganda. A pithy motto for those that believe that MT is the root of their (and everyone else's) problems.


  • #1503
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Rascasse wrote: »
    She knew that bankrupting the country would solve nothing. .............


    She knew how much the city would lose if the South Africans were thrun out,ye mean.


  • #1504
    Weathering
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,101 ✭✭✭Weathering


    In an interview with bbc this morning. Peter Mandelson said that M.T told him not to trust the Irish,they are liars.

    Aww thanks Maggie. Say Hi to Satan


  • #1505
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You aren't comparing, you are dismissing criticism of her 'because others are the same or worse'.

    Thatchers deregulation without built in oversight and monitoring (and she was warned about the consequences) allowed the US to dominate the financial markets, leading to the growth of derivative products and the locking together of global economies, it was only a matter of time until those markets succumbed to contagion. The sub prime fiasco could not have happened without the Big Bang.
    The solution to the crisis lies in revoking the freedoms ushered in by Thatcher; more control, oversight and monitoring, which speaks for itself.

    If i leave out-of-date milk in your fridge you can quite easily come blame me in a years time when it stinks up your fridge and kitchen.

    Or i can point out you could have thrown the milk in the bin, down the sink, down a drain. You had many options but go ahead and blame me for leaving the milk there.


  • #1506
    Rascasse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭Rascasse


    Nodin wrote: »
    She knew how much the city would lose if the South Africans were thrun out,ye mean.
    Such an incredibly simplistic way of looking at the situation.


  • Advertisement
  • #1507
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Nodin wrote: »
    She knew how much the city would lose if the South Africans were thrun out,ye mean.

    In the fullness of time though, the SA solution was very much a domestic solution and sanctions achieve little. Even in the present day, sanctions always hurt the ordinary Joe Soap on the ground and rarely, if ever, leverage a political solution.

    She NEVER "supported" Apartheid and not one of you can point out a direct quote where she said such a thing.

    She DID support an internal SA resolution to the conflict.

    Those two things are materially different.


  • #1508
    Playboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    space_man wrote: »
    just proving the point that she was a divisive, small-minded, bigot who had little or no understanding of Ireland or Irish people.

    i know you'ld rather not be reminded of that.

    You aren't proving any point.. you are posting an article that has been posted twice before and discussed. She wasn't Cromwell ffs. She was a democratically elected leader. What point are half of your trying to prove? That she didn't like the Irish ergo she she was scum. Utterly pointless, bitter and stupid debate. Get over yourselves. I love how people act like utter cretins and call people vile and scum because the other person supposedly did the same... a bit fckin rich isn't it.


  • #1509
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    In the fullness of time though, the SA solution was very much a domestic solution and sanctions achieve little. Even in the present day, sanctions always hurt the ordinary Joe Soap on the ground and rarely, if ever, leverage a political solution.
    .

    Yet when the US finally moved against SA, thats when the talking began. And the representatives of the "ordinary joe soap" wanted sanctions i might add.


  • #1510
    Playboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You aren't comparing, you are dismissing criticism of her 'because others are the same or worse'.

    Thatchers deregulation without built in oversight and monitoring (and she was warned about the consequences) allowed the US to dominate the financial markets, leading to the growth of derivative products and the locking together of global economies, it was only a matter of time until those markets succumbed to contagion. The sub prime fiasco could not have happened without the Big Bang.
    The solution to the crisis lies in revoking the freedoms ushered in by Thatcher; more control, oversight and monitoring, which speaks for itself.

    What are you on about? How did she deregulate the city? I work in the city because of Thatcher.. she broke up the old boys clubs, attracted foreign investment and created a fantastically successful industry that has carried Britain for the last 30 years. All those benefit cuts people bang on about well imagine how much they would be without the city of London subsidising the exchequer? New labour abolished the Bank of England's Powers, introduced the FSA (who failed miserably to regulate) and presided over the banking crisis. To say Thatcher had anything to do with the current mess is a load of bollox


  • #1511
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    golfball37 wrote: »
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/thatcher-dubbed-all-irish-liars-mandelson-says-591549.html

    Thatcher dubbed all Irish 'liars', Mandelson says

    Peter Mandelson said today that the only thing Margaret Thatcher ever told him was that the Irish were “all liars” and not to be trusted.

    The Labour former cabinet minister revealed the 1999 exchange as he explained why he did not want to attend the former premier’s funeral service.

    “I didn’t feel I knew her well enough” to apply for the tickets offered to peers, he told BBC Radio 4’s Today.

    “Although I helped to organise the Labour Party’s opposition to her policies throughout the 1980s, I only ever met her once.

    “It was the day I was appointed Northern Ireland secretary and our paths crossed.

    “She came up to me and she said, ’I’ve got one thing to say to you, my boy … you can’t trust the Irish, they are all liars’, she said, ’liars, and that’s what you have to remember, so just don’t forget it’.

    “With that she waltzed off and that was my only personal exposure to her.”

    Lord Mandelson, one of the central architects of New Labour, has criticised the scale of the funeral but accepted the Iron Lady “reframed British politics”.

    “I think what she was right to do was to bring home to us the reality that Britain could not afford rampant inflation, that state monopolies needed commercialising, that personal tax rates were too high and that enterprise was too unrewarding,” he said.

    “She was also right to argue that deregulation can be a valuable spur to innovation and efficiency and of course she tackled what was then a very disruptive and irresponsible trade union culture.

    “But the truth is also that in cutting back the state necessarily, she overlooked what the state can also do successfully.”
    ---

    I wonder what the likes of Lucinda Creighton make of this?

    The self loathing lot here love her for it.


  • Advertisement
  • #1512
    Playboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    [-0-] wrote: »
    The self loathing lot here love her for it.

    what is that supposed to mean? Who is self loathing and how did your intellect come to that conclusion? You would swear the woman presided over a genocide of the Irish? Pray tell what did she do to make you so bitter?


  • #1513
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Nodin wrote: »
    Yet when the US finally moved against SA, thats when the talking began. And the representatives of the "ordinary joe soap" wanted sanctions i might add.

    Yet you and others continually to misrepresent her policy to SA as "supporting" Apartheid.

    She supported an alternative resolution, an internal resolution, to the crisis.

    It would be like saying Reagan or Clinton supported terrorism in NI due to their policies, which by and large were simple - that there should be an internal (UK & Ire) solution.

    It's amazing how anybody who didn't tow the line on sanctions gets accused of this. Even the musician Paul Simon always takes a bucket-load of criticism for recording Gracelands in SA during Apartheid. He wanted to record with African musicians, i'm pretty certain he did not support murder, racism and terror.


  • #1514
    Rascasse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭Rascasse


    Nodin wrote: »
    Yet when the US finally moved against SA, thats when the talking began. And the representatives of the "ordinary joe soap" wanted sanctions i might add.

    Thatcher's letter to Botha shows that there were talks before US passed sanctions. I think the pass laws were repealed before the US sanctions too. Apartheid was already coming to an end, it just needed to be done at the right pace.


  • #1515
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Rascasse wrote: »
    Such an incredibly simplistic way of looking at the situation.

    Why? Just more evidence of how she continually put economic considerations before people. It is why she has left such a tainted legacy.


  • #1516
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Playboy wrote: »
    what is that supposed to mean? Who is self loathing and how did your intellect come to that conclusion? You would swear the woman presided over a genocide of the Irish? Pray tell what did she do to make you so bitter?
    LOL you'd be as well talking to the wall Playboy, some in here don't want to hear a bit of rational reasoning!

    Earth shattering revelations there that Maggie didn't like the Irish.

    We didn't like the English much either for large periods of our history.

    So what if she didn't like us. Sections of our island were trying to kill her. May slightly have coloured her views on us as a country.

    I was in France for the first time in 2001 and nearly every person i encountered was rude to me. The final straw was having my wallet robbed. I didn't particularly like the French much since then. All that being said i doubt anybody in France cares whether i like them or not and more importantly i'm sure the majority of French people are lovely.


  • #1517
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    Yet you and others continually to misrepresent her policy to SA as "supporting" Apartheid.
    .....

    While that was not literally the policy, thats what the policy did.


  • #1518
    Mr Tibbs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 420 ✭✭Mr Tibbs


    As the funeral cortege made it way down Whitehall all the poor people jeered in protest at the £10 million cost while all the toff's tried to drown out their protest by clapping. Even in death the Iron lady is as divisive as ever.
    Watching it on The Beeb I see they had Nicolas Witchell reporting from Whitehall. This is the man who had to make a groveling apology to Ireland when we hosted the Eurovision in 1993 about his snide remark calling The Green Glens Arena a cowshed. He made the perfect reporter for MRs T's funeral. A British upper crust toff who is in his element at all the pageantry, brown nosing among all the lords and ladies. I wonder if he see's Ruiri Quinn will he mistake him for Qaoimhghin O Caolain it wouldn't be the first time.


  • #1519
    Playboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Why? Just more evidence of how she continually put economic considerations before people. It is why she has left such a tainted legacy.

    Depends on what people. What about people in the UK at the time who were working hard and couldn't save because inflation was at 27%. She put them before the people on continuous strikes, who wouldn't negotiate, who were led by an extremist... 3 day work weeks, dead bodies not buried, rubbish piling on the streets for weeks, no power, massively reduced health service. She put the bullies down and turned Britain into a place where hard work was rewarded and private enterprise flourished. That benefits all the economy even the poor.


  • #1520
    Playboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    Mr Tibbs wrote: »
    As the funeral cortege made it way down Whitehall all the poor people jeered in protest at the £10 million cost while all the toff's tried to drown out their protest by clapping. Even in death the Iron lady is as divisive as ever.
    Watching it on The Beeb I see they had Nicolas Witchell reporting from Whitehall. This is the man who had to make a groveling apology to Ireland when we hosted the Eurovision in 1993 about his snide remark calling The Green Glens Arena a cowshed. He made the perfect reporter for MRs T's funeral. A British upper crust toff who is in his element at all the pageantry, brown nosing among all the lords and ladies. I wonder if he see's Ruiri Quinn will he mistake him for Qaoimhghin O Caolain it wouldn't be the first time.

    Need help to get that boulder off your shoulder?


  • #1521
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,566 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Mr Tibbs wrote: »
    As the funeral cortege made it way down Whitehall all the poor people jeered in protest at the £10 million cost while all the toff's tried to drown out their protest by clapping. Even in death the Iron lady is as divisive as ever.
    Watching it on The Beeb I see they had Nicolas Witchell reporting from Whitehall. This is the man who had to make a groveling apology to Ireland when we hosted the Eurovision in 1993 about his snide remark calling The Green Glens Arena a cowshed. He made the perfect reporter for MRs T's funeral. A British upper crust toff who is in his element at all the pageantry, brown nosing among all the lords and ladies. I wonder if he see's Ruiri Quinn will he mistake him for Qaoimhghin O Caolain it wouldn't be the first time.

    Careful Tibbs, the mask is slipping.


  • Advertisement
  • #1522
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Nodin wrote: »
    While that was not literally the policy, thats what the policy did.

    Strongly disagree.

    FW de Clerk wrote a long piece in which he stated the end of Apartheid would have come many years sooner in the absence of sanctions.

    Far from expediting the end of Apartheid, the sanctions prolonged them.

    He argued that the single greatest factor in ending Apartheid was economic growth in SA. Because sanctions greatly hurt growth, the ruling party was able to appeal to the white voters that this siege mentality hurting SA was to blame. A sort of "them and us", you're with us or against us.

    Whereas if growth was allowed to continue without sanctions, it would have been impossible to appeal to that section of society in the same way. You'd have had a more prosperous, inclusive SA and no "it's our way or the highway" mentality.

    If anything, Thatchers stance on SA may have expedited the end of Apartheid. We can never be certain of it but what is certain is she NEVER supported it.


  • #1523
    AEDIC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 444 ✭✭AEDIC


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You couldn't invent the willing delusions on here,
    South african ambassador gives his thoughts on meeting Thatcher = definitive proof. Peter Mandelson gives his = bluffing = 'he would say that etc etc.

    Not saying that you posted the South African ambassador article, but you aren't exactly addressing it with the same rigour. ;)

    I am sorry for my tardiness...I hadn't realised I had to address every post on here...

    Although I have said somewhere in the thread that I am not a big fan of Thatchers Foreign policy, but that I do not think as some say she supported Apartheid, its not a simple as that, she did, quite vociferously (sp?) support and lobby for the release of Mandela, and include many terms in dealing with SA that were dependent on them abolishing Apartheid. My opinion...seeing as you asked so nicely ;)

    The Mandy thing is retarded and tbh I am surprised you are putting even the slightest bit of creedance to it...even if it is just to prove a point.


  • #1524
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    Strongly disagree.

    FW de Clerk wrote a long piece in which he stated the end of Apartheid would have come many years sooner in the absence of sanctions.
    ....


    Seeing as he worked to prevent them, he's hardly going to admit he was wrong...


  • #1525
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Playboy wrote: »
    Depends on what people. What about people in the UK at the time who were working hard and couldn't save because inflation was at 27%. She put them before the people on continuous strikes, who wouldn't negotiate, who were led by an extremist... 3 day work weeks, dead bodies not buried, rubbish piling on the streets for weeks, no power, massively reduced health service. She put the bullies down and turned Britain into a place where hard work was rewarded and private enterprise flourished. That benefits all the economy even the poor.

    Run your perceptions of 'hard work' being 'rewarded' by a woman holding down two minimum wage jobs just to feed her kids or somebody who has no opportunity to work because of the devastation of their community by Tatcherism..
    It's no suprise that you see her har work mantra as applying to ALL. It didn't, it applied to a select few.
    And again...yes the unions needed to e faced up to, the economy needed fixing, as it did in most western countries at the time.
    What wasn't needed was the promotion of greed for the benefit of the few, which has caused the ever deepening rift in society in the UK as evidenced by the reaction to the death of the cheerleader.
    You keep your head in the sand there and apportion no blame to this woman if you wish, there is a whole section of society similarly insulated from the consequences of what this woman did.


  • #1526
    Playboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Run your perceptions of 'hard work' being 'rewarded' by a woman holding down two minimum wage jobs just to feed her kids or somebody who has no opportunity to work because of the devastation of their community by Tatcherism..
    It's no suprise that you see her har work mantra as applying to ALL. It didn't, it applied to a select few.
    And again...yes the unions needed to e faced up to, the economy needed fixing, as it did in most western countries at the time.
    What wasn't needed was the promotion of greed for the benefit of the few, which has caused the ever deepening rift in society in the UK as evidenced by the reaction to the death of the cheerleader.
    You keep your head in the sand there and apportion no blame to this woman if you wish, there is a whole section of society similarly insulated from the consequences of what this woman did.


    That is all unsubstantiated BS. How did her work hard mantra apply to few? You are just regurgitating the leftist BS. Lots of working class people voted for her many times, she allowed people who couldnt buy a house to buy their own homes for the first time. People protesting are jumping on a political band wagon because she is being made out to be some villain because she stood up to the unions and saved the British economy.


  • #1527
    Madam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,501 ✭✭✭Madam


    Nicholas Witchell - isn't that the guy Prince Charley said he couldn't stand the sight of?:)


  • #1528
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Playboy wrote: »
    That is all unsubstantiated BS. How did her work hard mantra apply to few? You are just regurgitating the leftist BS. Lots of working class people voted for her many times, she allowed people who couldnt buy a house to buy their own homes for the first time. People protesting are jumping on a political band wagon because she is being made out to be some villain because she stood up to the unions and saved the British economy.
    If you can't open your eyes there isn't much can be done for you. You go ahead and believe that the unprecedented protests and division since her death is based on chip on the shoulder leftist ranting if you wish, some of us believe that Britain has yet to pay the price for her term and that when it does, it won't be pretty.

    'Britain might never recover from being 'saved' by Maggie Thatcher'.


  • #1529
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Run your perceptions of 'hard work' being 'rewarded' by a woman holding down two minimum wage jobs just to feed her kids or somebody who has no opportunity to work because of the devastation of their community by Tatcherism..
    It's no suprise that you see her har work mantra as applying to ALL. It didn't, it applied to a select few.
    And again...yes the unions needed to e faced up to, the economy needed fixing, as it did in most western countries at the time.
    What wasn't needed was the promotion of greed for the benefit of the few, which has caused the ever deepening rift in society in the UK as evidenced by the reaction to the death of the cheerleader.
    You keep your head in the sand there and apportion no blame to this woman if you wish, there is a whole section of society similarly insulated from the consequences of what this woman did.

    My mam had 2 minimum wage jobs here in the 1980s to keep the 3 of us in Stews, Bowl-over-head haircuts and a week in Wexford a year. I have neighbours who to this day here have 2 part-time minimum wage jobs just to scrape by.

    I presume you are referring to the mining communities in the other point. Of course they had "opportunity to work", only not in the industry they had always known. A dying industry everywhere. Jobs were scarce, as they are nowadays, but you are making out like there was a law passed to prevent Miners from sending in CVs to jobs or from going to interviews!

    Point is - under any political leader, system and in any financial climate, people will always have to make the best of their way in life.

    This promotion of greed stuff is a nonsense. Basic human nature to want more. Whether it's a guy on £4million a year wanting £4.5million or a single mother on €19,000 a year from 2 jobs wanting €24,000 a year.

    It did not need the policies of Thatcher to create that intrinsic desire for more.


  • #1530
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,892 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    bnt wrote: »
    Yah, I think "definitive proof" was a bit too much, but the Telegraph piece supports what I already understood about that time and place. As events transpired, the South African government attitude was evolving, and change was possible without turning the country in to a war zone. Which is what would have happened had the Afrikaners been backed in to a corner. They were a minority, but they had most of the weapons, and they still commemorate the Battle of Blood River every year. :eek:

    They sure did have the weapons, as posted earlier they had several nuclear weapons available I personally wouldn't want to back anyone into a corner with nuclear capabilities and that includes N.Korea

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=84096860&postcount=966


  • Advertisement
  • #1531
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Run your perceptions of 'hard work' being 'rewarded' by a woman holding down two minimum wage jobs just to feed her kids or somebody who has no opportunity to work because of the devastation of their community by Tatcherism..
    It's no suprise that you see her har work mantra as applying to ALL. It didn't, it applied to a select few.
    And again...yes the unions needed to e faced up to, the economy needed fixing, as it did in most western countries at the time.
    What wasn't needed was the promotion of greed for the benefit of the few, which has caused the ever deepening rift in society in the UK as evidenced by the reaction to the death of the cheerleader.
    You keep your head in the sand there and apportion no blame to this woman if you wish, there is a whole section of society similarly insulated from the consequences of what this woman did.

    That is just a rant. You make it sound like she screwed everyone for the benefit of the 1%. And that is clearly not true. She was elected three times. And a majority of the UK population think she was good for the country. Look at any opinion poll since her death.

    There is a signifcant and vocal minority that think she was a poor PM who executed poor policy, but to present her legacy as a promotion of greed for the benefit of the view is just baseless nonsense


Advertisement
Advertisement