• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Interesting (?) Political stuff...

DANGERCLOSE said:
Click to expand...
He is an idiot if he has asked for this to be done.
History is important and should be left for all to see.
Churchill was a great man whose leadership has sadly allowed this rabble to be in power and do what they are doing.
This lot really scare me.
They planned a cleansing of everyone they don't like - including millions of us - and it is all working very well so far.
By the time I hit 70 years old this Country could be ruined - much more than it is now!
Agents Starmer, Khan, Rayner, Reeves and others are seriously flawed people with Communist tendencies.
It makes one shiver a little.
 
The Dolphin said:
He is an idiot if he has asked for this to be done.
History is important and should be left for all to see.
Churchill was a great man whose leadership has sadly allowed this rabble to be in power and do what they are doing.
This lot really scare me.
They planned a cleansing of everyone they don't like - including millions of us - and it is all working very well so far.
By the time I hit 70 years old this Country could be ruined - much more than it is now!
Agents Starmer, Khan, Rayner, Reeves and others are seriously flawed people with Communist tendencies.
It makes one shiver a little.
Click to expand...
I would agree with you that the left's view of Churchill is essentially neo communism and thus (somewhat ironically) anti white because of their view of history and power structures....which they have largely inverted against the English/British.....all mostly allowed to happen by careerists and cowards in the Conservative party.

However, while I believe Churchill would be against much of modern Britain and what's happened to us, I also have come to accept that a lot of it what we have now is down to WW1 & WW2 and the opening of the door to run away social liberalism once his and the war generations died off.....there was no firewall.
 
Last edited:
As Starmer enters the White House for his talk with Trump even the BBC are writing about how this isn't an even power dynamic and that Britain have few cards to play.

They talk about how the Britain of the past exerted more influence over the White House.....yeah guess what that was when we had a ruling British class that wasn't continually slagging them off.

I've made this point many times now but I rarely tire as it p1sses me off so much.

What they won't write about of course is how it's people like them who are responsible for taking a British Empire that could actually have a big say in the world and reducing it down to nothing more than a non descript player in Europe.

They moved heaven and earth to strip us of power and then whine about how little we can effect things when it's important.....while ineffectively slagging off those who actually make the decisions.
 
Stirlingsays said:
As Starmer enters the White House for his talk with Trump even the BBC are writing about how this isn't an even power dynamic and that Britain have few cards to play.

They talk about how the Britain of the past exerted more influence over the White House.....yeah guess what that was when we had a ruling British class that wasn't continually slagging them off.

I've made this point many times now but I rarely tire as it p1sses me off so much.

What they won't write about of course is how it's people like them who are responsible for taking a British Empire that could actually have a big say in the world and reducing it down to nothing more than a non descript player in Europe.

They moved heaven and earth to strip us of power and then whine about how little we can effect things when it's important.....while ineffectively slagging off those who actually make the decisions.
Click to expand...

So which countries would you have denied independence to?
 
Stirlingsays said:
While that's a good and reasonable question....it's a bit off of what my thrust was.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with Britain no longer being a great power. The problem is that our politicians still think we are and want a chair at the big table.

I would be quite happy if we were like Switzerland, Spain or Norway. We need to stop sticking our noses into other people's business.

By all means spend more on defence, we can use the troops to protect our borders. It annoys me that the EU still expects us to defend them when they wont even pony up for their own defence. We need to do a Trump and tell them it's their problem.
 
DanH said:
Was it? So you weren’t lamenting the fact that we no longer have an empire?
Click to expand...

It's not so much about the Empire Dan, it's about the influence that comes from maintaining a power structure.

What I will say before I have to pop out is that if you look at the American empire of today.....it doesn't operate by invasion and conquest.....if it does invade it leaves relatively quickly....Afghanistan and Iraq proving what a mistake it is to attempt to Empire build....especially with cultures that aren't similar.

Like the British learnt in India, you don't rule for long if you only use subjugation, you rule by moderated cultural influence backed up by economic dependence of those client states.

That's the model the United States learnt from the British Empire and while later generations have somewhat been ignorant of those lessons the structural system is hard wired in place even now.......Which is why Trump is such a shock to the system and that client states in Europe are pretty powerless.
 
Stirlingsays said:
What I will say before I have to pop out is that if you look at the American empire of today.....it doesn't operate by invasion and conquest.....if it does invade it leaves relatively quickly....Afghanistan and Iraq proving what a mistake that is.

Like the British learnt in India, you don't rule for long if you only use subjugation, you rule by cultural influence backed up by economic dependence of those client states.

That's the model the United States learnt from the British Empire and while later generations have somewhat been ignorant of those lessons the structural system is hard wired in place even now.......Which is why Trump is such a shock to the system and that client states in Europe are pretty powerless.
Click to expand...
China is the role model although I don't like the regime. I was in Laos and the locals dislike the Chinese who effectively tell the Lao government what to do as they are in hock to them with loans. China does the same thing all over Asia and Africa but their aid comes at a high price. It's why Trump is moaning about the Panama Canal he is genuinely worried about Chinese influence.

Why invade a country when you can control it at arm's length. If we are going to give foreign aid what's in it for us?
 
Badger11 said:
I don't have a problem with Britain no longer being a great power. The problem is that our politicians still think we are and want a chair at the big table.

I would be quite happy if we were like Switzerland, Spain or Norway. We need to stop sticking our noses into other people's business.

By all means spend more on defence, we can use the troops to protect our borders. It annoys me that the EU still expects us to defend them when they wont even pony up for their own defence. We need to do a Trump and tell them it's their problem.
Click to expand...

I somewhat agree that our Empire would have reduced in the modern age (as will happen with the US)......However, in truth what happened was WW2 destroyed us as an Empire power and we went into quick managed decline....which hasn't stopped since.

The drop has been giddying for those who actually know the history.

In the ultimate analysis if you give up power you give up control of your destiny.....and losing control of our destiny has been the legacy of British neo/social liberalism.
 
Badger11 said:
China is the role model although I don't like the regime. I was in Laos and the locals dislike the Chinese who effectively tell the Lao government what to do as they are in hock to them with loans. China does the same thing all over Asia and Africa but their aid comes at a high price. It's why Trump is moaning about the Panama Canal he is genuinely worried about Chinese influence.

Why invade a country when you can control it at arm's length. If we are going to give foreign aid what's in it for us?
Click to expand...
I thought a lot of it is backhanders for trade.
 
 
DANGERCLOSE said:
Click to expand...

Starmer is proud of free speech?

He throws people in jail for mean tweets.....the guy lies about everything.
 
While I fully support Vance's commentary on the establishment in Britain in terms of its erosion of free speech I think Starmer appears to have done quite well with Trump.

We are probably going to avoid the tariffs that the EU will probably get.....hopefully an enlarged deal, though I hope that Kennedy can sort out some of our concerns in terms of why we block certain products.
 
DANGERCLOSE said:
Click to expand...
Exactly what we said when we saw this. Except I did not call him an actor!!
 
Papers today full of government plans to get rid of underperforming civil servants.

The big idea is to agree a pay off or put them on a personal development plan and if they don't improve finally the sack.

Whilst I have no issue with the plans it beggars belief that these policies have not been in place before. It's all pretty standard corporate HR. No wonder the Civil Service is such a nice place to work.

The devil is in the detail especially the pay off. Will these useless people be dragging a sack load of gold out of the office or will the pay off's be proportionate to their length of service?

Under-performing civil servants to be incentivised to leave jobs in new plans

The pay of top officials could be linked to performance under reforms expected to be set out next week.
www.bbc.co.uk
 
1. The Tories wanted to streamline it but Labour and the Unions kicked off.
2. It is just a headline to appease us - they have no intention of doing anything of the sort - since when have Labour reduced the public sector!
3. Even if they do get rid of a few high ups, they will be close to retirement but will get massive pay offs.
This Government will only do harm not good.
 
Badger11 said:
Papers today full of government plans to get rid of underperforming civil servants.

The big idea is to agree a pay off or put them on a personal development plan and if they don't improve finally the sack.

Whilst I have no issue with the plans it beggars belief that these policies have not been in place before. It's all pretty standard corporate HR. No wonder the Civil Service is such a nice place to work.

The devil is in the detail especially the pay off. Will these useless people be dragging a sack load of gold out of the office or will the pay off's be proportionate to their length of service?

Under-performing civil servants to be incentivised to leave jobs in new plans

The pay of top officials could be linked to performance under reforms expected to be set out next week.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Having worked for the Civil Service for over 40 years, the Senior Managers got worse as time went on. They were not interested in the workings of the Department they were assigned to but just how they could enhance their careers. Successive Governments have employed people at a Senior level because they can sell themselves on paper rather than having a capability of running a Department… I have seen this many times. I very much doubt any will be sacked, they will be just moved to another Department. PPD in the CS is ridiculous, I was 6 months away from retiring after 44 years and they insisted I had one. I explained they were more than welcome to waste their time and money, still waiting 8 years later
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top