FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Great Leaders in History
Great Leaders in History
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands " Could say that for a lot of leaders.He overthrew a corrupt and despised system and changed the country forever. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Do you know OP you've made me think. Yeah you're right. What makes a great leader. How about Montgomery or Rommel. They managed to combined leadership, a genuine desire to minimise casualties but ability to make decisions that at times upset and got a fair few people killed. The former survived the war and was given a state burial, the latter didn't and he received a state funeral. Oh the irony of it." They were more military leaders than political though? | |||
"Yeah thats my point really! Successful leaders aren’t nice people. Maybe we just have 2 Great ones at the Top now, History will tell I guess. Being elected can be a popularity contest. Being Considered Great is not " It depends what you mean by great. Boris and Trump and their teams are excellent at propaganda, filling their own pockets and ignoring scientific advice. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands " That's an understatement probably murdered more than Hitler,let his people starve | |||
"In politics, as in life, people who act decisively in a crisis are considered "great". People who precipitate crises in order to create change are considered "great". People who avoid crises occuring by predicting them and averting them are not considered "great". People who change things for the better subtly and quietly are not considered "great". Nobody knows who they are. So a genuinely "great" leader for me is perhaps the opposite of what is being asked." Interesting point I think,could be a book on this one | |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands That's an understatement probably murdered more than Hitler,let his people starve" Just to be clear Lenin was not in the Beatles | |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands That's an understatement probably murdered more than Hitler,let his people starve" Just to be clear Lenin was not in the Beatles | |||
| |||
"Lenin and Castro? I’m surprised Pol Pot didn’t make that list... " Slight difference I think you will find | |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands That's an understatement probably murdered more than Hitler,let his people starve" Erm..that was stalin | |||
| |||
"Lenin and Castro? I’m surprised Pol Pot didn’t make that list... Slight difference I think you will find " Only slight - the 3 all committed huge atrocities against their people and opponents whilst following a Marxist ideology | |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands Could say that for a lot of leaders.He overthrew a corrupt and despised system and changed the country forever. " Only to be deposed by Stalin to create an even worse one  | |||
"Lenin and Castro? I’m surprised Pol Pot didn’t make that list... Slight difference I think you will find Only slight - the 3 all committed huge atrocities against their people and opponents whilst following a Marxist ideology " The question was ..what makes a successful leader? The Russians lost between 3m and 15m in ww1 .lenin stopped that bloodshed. He was also involved in a civil war | |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands Could say that for a lot of leaders.He overthrew a corrupt and despised system and changed the country forever. Only to be deposed by Stalin to create an even worse one "No sure lenin "created'stalin. | |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands Could say that for a lot of leaders.He overthrew a corrupt and despised system and changed the country forever. Only to be deposed by Stalin to create an even worse one
No sure lenin "created'stalin."He did however create gulags and the KGB | |||
"Lenin, not sure he was a nice guy, few deaths on his hands Could say that for a lot of leaders.He overthrew a corrupt and despised system and changed the country forever. Only to be deposed by Stalin to create an even worse one
No sure lenin "created'stalin.
He did however create gulags and the KGB"He cant be blamed for stalin | |||
"Lenin and Castro? I’m surprised Pol Pot didn’t make that list... Slight difference I think you will find Only slight - the 3 all committed huge atrocities against their people and opponents whilst following a Marxist ideology The question was ..what makes a successful leader? The Russians lost between 3m and 15m in ww1 .lenin stopped that bloodshed. He was also involved in a civil war" It was more a question of name a Successful leader who had a nice guy image | |||
| |||
"How about Franklin D Roosevelt. The last president to be elected before the 2 term rule became active. he must have been pretty popular. What about the New deal. Surely we need someone like him again in charge of America ??? " I said fdr | |||
| |||
| |||
"How about Franklin D Roosevelt. The last president to be elected before the 2 term rule became active. he must have been pretty popular. What about the New deal. Surely we need someone like him again in charge of America ??? I said fdr" FDR Millionaires Son Used Technology to address the nation Subjected Japanese US. Citizens to concentration camps Political Bully too, renowned for it his way or no way. Great President they say, very popular with his supporters. | |||
"How about Franklin D Roosevelt. The last president to be elected before the 2 term rule became active. he must have been pretty popular. What about the New deal. Surely we need someone like him again in charge of America ??? I said fdr FDR Millionaires Son Used Technology to address the nation Subjected Japanese US. Citizens to concentration camps Political Bully too, renowned for it his way or no way. Great President they say, very popular with his supporters. " Millionaires son..are you messing with your views on trump? So trump is decisive but Fdr was a bully? | |||
"How about Franklin D Roosevelt. The last president to be elected before the 2 term rule became active. he must have been pretty popular. What about the New deal. Surely we need someone like him again in charge of America ??? I said fdr FDR Millionaires Son Used Technology to address the nation Subjected Japanese US. Citizens to concentration camps Political Bully too, renowned for it his way or no way. Great President they say, very popular with his supporters. Millionaires son..are you messing with your views on trump? So trump is decisive but Fdr was a bully?" No they are your views on Trump i stating facts On FDR You see one as Great and the other a fucking idiot I see both as great | |||
| |||
"Bobby Kennedy. The last true statesman." You thinking of Alan B’Stard or Dom Raab | |||
"Bobby Kennedy. The last true statesman. You thinking of Alan B’Stard or Dom Raab " Alan B'STAD a great great man rip Rick | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. " But did she have a nice guy image? Wonderful Leader no doubt about that! | |||
"FDR was a good president, dumb donny isn't good enough to wipe FDR's ass, or anyone else for that matter. Dumb donny is an idiot in the true sense of the word. A walking talking joke of a human being and as a president." Well theres 2 who are not “nice guys” | |||
"Lech Walesa "Yeah he can go on the list! | |||
| |||
| |||
""It is a great advantage to a president, and a major source of safety to the country, for him to know that he is not a great man." President Calvin Coolidge" I know little of him really, other than a President between the Wars nicked named Cautious Think that says enough, not a happy time for the USA under him. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. " She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. | |||
""It is a great advantage to a president, and a major source of safety to the country, for him to know that he is not a great man." President Calvin Coolidge I know little of him really, other than a President between the Wars nicked named Cautious Think that says enough, not a happy time for the USA under him." I'm not claiming that he was a great leader at all. It's the quote that I'm drawing attention to. | |||
""It is a great advantage to a president, and a major source of safety to the country, for him to know that he is not a great man." President Calvin Coolidge I know little of him really, other than a President between the Wars nicked named Cautious Think that says enough, not a happy time for the USA under him. I'm not claiming that he was a great leader at all. It's the quote that I'm drawing attention to." Undertstood  | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive." Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. " Love Maggie in charge now she would have got in top of this virus better than anyone | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made" How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. Love Maggie in charge now she would have got in top of this virus better than anyone"With any luck she would have caught it. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. " Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. " Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap." The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft" I take it you dont approve of unions? | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft" Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault?" Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson " Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson " Touched a nerve there didnt I? I find it quite amusing you throw words around like militant and Ricky Tomlinson like they are insults. Are you actually going to answer my questions re unions? We were all 'prosperous?I'm.sorry have you been to some daily mail dedication centre? 3m unemployed,record levels of poverty,the worst riots this country has ever seen,smack destroying communities,a city left to 'managed decline"poll tax riots. Halcyon days indeed. The rail privatisation has been such a success the most far right gmnt in decades are having to step in and re nationalise parts of it. You seem very disparaging of our workforce..I thought you Tories were meant to be patriotic? | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Touched a nerve there didnt I? I find it quite amusing you throw words around like militant and Ricky Tomlinson like they are insults. Are you actually going to answer my questions re unions? We were all 'prosperous?I'm.sorry have you been to some daily mail dedication centre? 3m unemployed,record levels of poverty,the worst riots this country has ever seen,smack destroying communities,a city left to 'managed decline"poll tax riots. Halcyon days indeed. The rail privatisation has been such a success the most far right gmnt in decades are having to step in and re nationalise parts of it. You seem very disparaging of our workforce..I thought you Tories were meant to be patriotic? " Ok In your speak “Poverty my arse” Kids would have no food at all in tge 70’s and 80’s Hand me downs Left overs They are all fat little fuckers now | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020." So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises?" In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should." To be clear inflation is not what you do to your girlfriend! | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Touched a nerve there didnt I? I find it quite amusing you throw words around like militant and Ricky Tomlinson like they are insults. Are you actually going to answer my questions re unions? We were all 'prosperous?I'm.sorry have you been to some daily mail dedication centre? 3m unemployed,record levels of poverty,the worst riots this country has ever seen,smack destroying communities,a city left to 'managed decline"poll tax riots. Halcyon days indeed. The rail privatisation has been such a success the most far right gmnt in decades are having to step in and re nationalise parts of it. You seem very disparaging of our workforce..I thought you Tories were meant to be patriotic? Ok In your speak “Poverty my arse” Kids would have no food at all in tge 70’s and 80’s Hand me downs Left overs They are all fat little fuckers now " You have lost me | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should." So no pay rises unless promoted or in line with inflation? What its lower than inflation.? | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should. To be clear inflation is not what you do to your girlfriend!" Stop being so pathetic. | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should. So no pay rises unless promoted or in line with inflation? What its lower than inflation.?" Well thats where collective bargaining takes over with your Unions come in or you workforce reps. They will look at the company finances, the next 12 months ahead or ahead to then end of the pay deal and negotiate. There is also a minimum wage don’t forget As a student of all things political you will be aware that it was Unions fighting with Labour governments prior to Lady Thatcher which started the mess. Civil war between the Unions and the Political parties who represent them. This is why Union membership is a thing of the past with a massive decline. | |||
"Lech Walesa
Yeah he can go on the list!"Are you sure? I'm not | |||
"Lech Walesa
Yeah he can go on the list!
Are you sure? I'm not"Your call I can remember him on TV as a kid when he stood up to The Soviets But thats it | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should. So no pay rises unless promoted or in line with inflation? What its lower than inflation.? Well thats where collective bargaining takes over with your Unions come in or you workforce reps. They will look at the company finances, the next 12 months ahead or ahead to then end of the pay deal and negotiate. There is also a minimum wage don’t forget As a student of all things political you will be aware that it was Unions fighting with Labour governments prior to Lady Thatcher which started the mess. Civil war between the Unions and the Political parties who represent them. This is why Union membership is a thing of the past with a massive decline. " I'm still waiting for my question about the unions. Membership has declined as the unions have been decimated and anti union legislation. Presumably this pay thing will apply to everyone bankers,CEO's etc? And we didnt get a pay rise in 6 years so how does that tally? | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should. So no pay rises unless promoted or in line with inflation? What its lower than inflation.? Well thats where collective bargaining takes over with your Unions come in or you workforce reps. They will look at the company finances, the next 12 months ahead or ahead to then end of the pay deal and negotiate. There is also a minimum wage don’t forget As a student of all things political you will be aware that it was Unions fighting with Labour governments prior to Lady Thatcher which started the mess. Civil war between the Unions and the Political parties who represent them. This is why Union membership is a thing of the past with a massive decline. I'm still waiting for my question about the unions. Membership has declined as the unions have been decimated and anti union legislation. Presumably this pay thing will apply to everyone bankers,CEO's etc? And we didnt get a pay rise in 6 years so how does that tally?" Unions are not needed to protect workers rights There are very very extensive laws the EU put in place to protect these, your Social Partners in Germany took care of that! 6 years, seems you had secure employment, I guess it avoided job cuts though! | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should. So no pay rises unless promoted or in line with inflation? What its lower than inflation.? Well thats where collective bargaining takes over with your Unions come in or you workforce reps. They will look at the company finances, the next 12 months ahead or ahead to then end of the pay deal and negotiate. There is also a minimum wage don’t forget As a student of all things political you will be aware that it was Unions fighting with Labour governments prior to Lady Thatcher which started the mess. Civil war between the Unions and the Political parties who represent them. This is why Union membership is a thing of the past with a massive decline. I'm still waiting for my question about the unions. Membership has declined as the unions have been decimated and anti union legislation. Presumably this pay thing will apply to everyone bankers,CEO's etc? And we didnt get a pay rise in 6 years so how does that tally? Unions are not needed to protect workers rights There are very very extensive laws the EU put in place to protect these, your Social Partners in Germany took care of that! 6 years, seems you had secure employment, I guess it avoided job cuts though! " I couldn't disagree more You only have to look at the piss taking which goes on at the likes of Amazon Without the unions we would all be doing 18 hr days 6 days a week We are not in the eu anymore | |||
"Very surprised that nobody yet has mentioned Thatcher. Yes, she could be described as divisive. Yes, some loathed her, but she was a great leader. She had more balls than most of the rest of the House of Commons at the time. She saw off the Argentinians within months when they invaded the Falklands. She provoked a pointless war that led to hundreds of dead because she was behind in the polls. She was a vindictive ***** who destroyed entire communities. She was loved in certain parts of the country and utterly despised in others..so much so there were steet parties when she died. She was successful in so far as she won 3 elections but is probally the most destructive leader the country has ever known...with riots on The streets throughout her reign Not for me Clive. Im not sure Clive, I think the militants in the trade unions have a lot to answer for. They destroyed our car industry and others alike. One out all out approach, comrade calling and all that. Blood on her hands with regards the Falklands again, backed into an impossible situation by an invasion on British soil. The rebels were about to strike all over our commonwealth a stand had to be made How did the 'militants'destroy The car industry? She had no intention.of sitting down with them..she wanted to destroy them and she did with the miners and in wapping. Unions are there to protect workers rights..you either support that or you dont. She provoked the war..look at the belgrano.Without getting into a conflict about the ethics of colonialism I think even Reagan wanted diplomatic talks but she refused.Many conscripted foreign young men died,she rejoiced in it and people lapped it up. She also enjoyed cosying up to despotic murderous regimes (Pinochet)and put us in danger by allowing the Americans to put their nuclear missiles here. If I were to give her any praise I'd say she was strong willed but politics is also about compromise. People loved her.People despised her.There was no middle ground she was that decisive. She spit thr country in 2. Yeah I guess she did. Working man grafter did well Militant obstructor, well many did not, until Blair came along with his its ok dont worry about working the state will pay if not turn to crime as there will be no consequences Lines in the sand drawn up in society people decided where they stood. Most working grafters were thrown on the scrapheap. The places of work were thrown on the scrap heap, as productivity was poor due to Unions obstructing efficiency, Unions and their Stewards were not representing the workers, they used them as tools of war against the employers. Investment in manufacturing left our shores for countries where workforces we able to graft Where workforces were cheaper I think you will find.,We started importing dirty coal from china I think Plus we sold everything off..telecommunications,transport,gas,water..was that the unions fault? Ohh god Workforces not restricted by hours, holidays sick days, overtime bans, or completely non flexible because thats someone elses job cant do that mate we’ll have to go home one out all out. Telecommunications BT imagine where we would be now... www er no mobiles errr no British Rail.... Joke British Gas ... bills sky high and workers striking near gas bound to explode. We would all be sat there with no dinner and no central heating. You are crazy and living in the past, who the hell would want to go back to that way of living What was set in stone by the Thatcher Government has allowed us all to prosper and our standard of living, education and i’ll say it Health Care is a magnitude away from the “good old days pre-Thatcher” You are that Brain washed with anti-Tory bollox you sound like Ricky Tomlinson Ive just double checked .... unions demanding 40% increases for Miners in the 70’s Car works 20% and Vauxhalls accepting 8.5% Ford 17.5% Unions running and ruining the country, I urge you to read up and not rely on your teachings I understand how people are influenced by elders, the mouth in the pub, or even the bearded clam. But its time to form your own opinions on 2020. So basically people shouldn't have pay rises? In line with inflation yes they should or as part of a promotion they should. So no pay rises unless promoted or in line with inflation? What its lower than inflation.? Well thats where collective bargaining takes over with your Unions come in or you workforce reps. They will look at the company finances, the next 12 months ahead or ahead to then end of the pay deal and negotiate. There is also a minimum wage don’t forget As a student of all things political you will be aware that it was Unions fighting with Labour governments prior to Lady Thatcher which started the mess. Civil war between the Unions and the Political parties who represent them. This is why Union membership is a thing of the past with a massive decline. I'm still waiting for my question about the unions. Membership has declined as the unions have been decimated and anti union legislation. Presumably this pay thing will apply to everyone bankers,CEO's etc? And we didnt get a pay rise in 6 years so how does that tally? Unions are not needed to protect workers rights There are very very extensive laws the EU put in place to protect these, your Social Partners in Germany took care of that! 6 years, seems you had secure employment, I guess it avoided job cuts though! I couldn't disagree more You only have to look at the piss taking which goes on at the likes of Amazon Without the unions we would all be doing 18 hr days 6 days a week We are not in the eu anymore " Laws stand at 48hrs We continue to adhere to EU laws im sure you know this. | |||
| |||
"The unions got too powerful and by 1979 they had destroyed our manufacturing industries coal, steel, shipbuilding and principally the car industry and thus the associated supply chain businesses Thatcher introduced more balance to the union relationship. The decisions she made in the face of hostile opposition mark her as a great leader as she was brave enough to make difficult decisions that reversed what had gone before but with hindsight have been proven right. " Unions too powerful ? Thats what the shareholders told her. Decisions that were difficult but are now right ? Laughable. Sold off the countrys assets to pay off debt Instead of investing . BT now a multi million profitable bujsness BP now a multiple billion profitable buisness British gas now.a multi million pound profitablrle buisness None of which goes to the coffers | |||
| |||
"The unions got too powerful and by 1979 they had destroyed our manufacturing industries coal, steel, shipbuilding and principally the car industry and thus the associated supply chain businesses Thatcher introduced more balance to the union relationship. The decisions she made in the face of hostile opposition mark her as a great leader as she was brave enough to make difficult decisions that reversed what had gone before but with hindsight have been proven right. " Excellent revisionism there. Thatcher destroyed the manufacturing base in this country, created millions of unemployed and sold off the family silver to her chums. If not for the Falklands, she's have been out on her ear after one term | |||
"The unions got too powerful and by 1979 they had destroyed our manufacturing industries coal, steel, shipbuilding and principally the car industry and thus the associated supply chain businesses Thatcher introduced more balance to the union relationship. The decisions she made in the face of hostile opposition mark her as a great leader as she was brave enough to make difficult decisions that reversed what had gone before but with hindsight have been proven right. " More balance?she destroyed them Can you explain how a union can destroy an industry? And what decisions have been proved right? | |||
"Alfred the Great " Lol | |||
| |||
| |||
"For,Martin luther king,churchill was a great wartime leader but a bit of a cunt domestically,what Lenin did was historic,Gorbachev,Castro." Castro? Jesus fucking christ. I now know not to take you seriously. Bet you have poster of Idi Amin too | |||
"For,Martin luther king,churchill was a great wartime leader but a bit of a cunt domestically,what Lenin did was historic,Gorbachev,Castro. Castro? Jesus fucking christ. I now know not to take you seriously. Bet you have poster of Idi Amin too" I never said he was a paragon of virtue we were discussing successful leaders. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"To be a great leader, you have to instil confidence in the masses but take tough decisions that may result in some of the masses suffering in some form or other and to different degrees. To stay a great leader, you need to be ruthless. Finding a great one and a compassionate one is difficult! Trump and Johnson do not come anywhere close to being great." By your definition, Trump and Johnson are halfway there.
Plenty of the masses are suffering in some form or other, to different degrees. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders " I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". | |||
| |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". " Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy?" Big calls there | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there " You can take your pick over who gets which one. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there " All great leaders have to make big calls. Lionel Hutz for PM. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one." Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image." I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. " 4 wives on the go too | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. 4 wives on the go too " Is that pertinent? | |||
| |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. " He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. | |||
"Ghengis Khan was some man, look what he managed and apparently a huge number of people in the world are descended from him due to his prowess" Almost everybody in Lithuania, before the Soviets displaced them, is descended from his hoards. A few probably from him, too! | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. 4 wives on the go too Is that pertinent?" I feel so, this is a swingers site after all | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for." Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you? | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there All great leaders have to make big calls. Lionel Hutz for PM." You are aware that Lionel Hutz is the bumbling lawyer from the Simpson? An ambulance chasing man with questionable ethics, and bungling competence. A good call then!  | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there All great leaders have to make big calls. Lionel Hutz for PM. You are aware that Lionel Hutz is the bumbling lawyer from the Simpson? An ambulance chasing man with questionable ethics, and bungling competence. A good call then! "Thats who I'm basing myself on
Always amuses me getting called lionel | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you?" That is the point. Being "great" comes in contradiction to something else which another guy thinks is "great". So nice people will not aspire to greatness so you are left with a selection of self-regarding individuals to choose from. | |||
| |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you? That is the point. Being "great" comes in contradiction to something else which another guy thinks is "great". So nice people will not aspire to greatness so you are left with a selection of self-regarding individuals to choose from." Right now you said that in simple terms i understand. Im glad you did because that was the answer i was looking for. Great Leaders are not there to be liked, they are there to better their country. If that upsets some of their subjects, then they are probably doing a good job. Now that we have finally agreed that, we can all just let both Donald Trump and Boris Johnson get on with delivering their great work, and get back to watching UK gold. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you? That is the point. Being "great" comes in contradiction to something else which another guy thinks is "great". So nice people will not aspire to greatness so you are left with a selection of self-regarding individuals to choose from. Right now you said that in simple terms i understand. Im glad you did because that was the answer i was looking for. Great Leaders are not there to be liked, they are there to better their country. If that upsets some of their subjects, then they are probably doing a good job. Now that we have finally agreed that, we can all just let both Donald Trump and Boris Johnson get on with delivering their great work, and get back to watching UK gold. " You mentioned in another thread you would do something about carbon emissions if you were PM for a day. How do you square the hero worship of Trump and Johnson with their record on climate change? | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you? That is the point. Being "great" comes in contradiction to something else which another guy thinks is "great". So nice people will not aspire to greatness so you are left with a selection of self-regarding individuals to choose from. Right now you said that in simple terms i understand. Im glad you did because that was the answer i was looking for. Great Leaders are not there to be liked, they are there to better their country. If that upsets some of their subjects, then they are probably doing a good job. Now that we have finally agreed that, we can all just let both Donald Trump and Boris Johnson get on with delivering their great work, and get back to watching UK gold. You mentioned in another thread you would do something about carbon emissions if you were PM for a day. How do you square the hero worship of Trump and Johnson with their record on climate change? " They’ll get around to it, i had capacity in my day as PM. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you? That is the point. Being "great" comes in contradiction to something else which another guy thinks is "great". So nice people will not aspire to greatness so you are left with a selection of self-regarding individuals to choose from. Right now you said that in simple terms i understand. Im glad you did because that was the answer i was looking for. Great Leaders are not there to be liked, they are there to better their country. If that upsets some of their subjects, then they are probably doing a good job. Now that we have finally agreed that, we can all just let both Donald Trump and Boris Johnson get on with delivering their great work, and get back to watching UK gold. You mentioned in another thread you would do something about carbon emissions if you were PM for a day. How do you square the hero worship of Trump and Johnson with their record on climate change? They’ll get around to it, i had capacity in my day as PM. " They won't get around it. They're both ignoring (or in trump's case not understanding) the science. And are actively contributing to the problem. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you? That is the point. Being "great" comes in contradiction to something else which another guy thinks is "great". So nice people will not aspire to greatness so you are left with a selection of self-regarding individuals to choose from. Right now you said that in simple terms i understand. Im glad you did because that was the answer i was looking for. Great Leaders are not there to be liked, they are there to better their country. If that upsets some of their subjects, then they are probably doing a good job. Now that we have finally agreed that, we can all just let both Donald Trump and Boris Johnson get on with delivering their great work, and get back to watching UK gold. You mentioned in another thread you would do something about carbon emissions if you were PM for a day. How do you square the hero worship of Trump and Johnson with their record on climate change? They’ll get around to it, i had capacity in my day as PM. They won't get around it. They're both ignoring (or in trump's case not understanding) the science. And are actively contributing to the problem. " Well listen, here’s the plan. We wait, then once Germany have cracked it, then made it more efficient than anyone else, we will just copy them. Until then lets just crack in with what we’re good at. | |||
"Great leaders with a nice guy image was the question I think they will be pretty scarce Point being Johnson and Trump are despised by their opposition. They can still be great leaders I guess this depends on the definition of "great leader". Bumbling,untrustworthy,corrupt,mysognostic,racist,lacking in integrity or empathy? Big calls there You can take your pick over who gets which one. Right so lets help Lionel as he is obsessed with Trump and Boris. For the sake of moving forward lets agree Trump and Boris are not great leaders with nice guy images. Now can we get back to find a great Leader with a nice guy image. I can't think of many people from the modern era who are great leaders. Never mind who have the nice-person image. Both are subjective. Wangchuck from Bhutan for example. He's generally considered a nicer guy. They measure their countries success in GNH - Gross National Happiness. So they make decisions on what's best for the happiness of the population. So this kind of leader wouldn't be considered great by capitalists. He is an absolute monarch though. So a great leader in a system that is not ideal in many ways as it depends on one person remaining a benevolent dictator and not transitioning into being a malevolent one. Is the Dalai Lama a great leader in a similar sense? Yes in his patience and continued commitment to nonviolence but not in any success in returning Tibet to some level of freedom. Of course if he was to be a "great" leader under the definitions of many bin organising some form of uprising he would also be a terrorist to many. "Greatness" is a pretty meaningless and vainglorious thing to aim for. Ok sounds like you dont want to offer up any nominations. Surely there must be other threads other threads which are of more interest to you? That is the point. Being "great" comes in contradiction to something else which another guy thinks is "great". So nice people will not aspire to greatness so you are left with a selection of self-regarding individuals to choose from. Right now you said that in simple terms i understand. Im glad you did because that was the answer i was looking for. Great Leaders are not there to be liked, they are there to better their country. If that upsets some of their subjects, then they are probably doing a good job. Now that we have finally agreed that, we can all just let both Donald Trump and Boris Johnson get on with delivering their great work, and get back to watching UK gold. " A "great" leader doesn't have to have improved anything. They just have to "win" and write the history book. I'm not either of their "subjects". We view the world very differently, again. | |||
| |||
