This Is Really Desperate Stuff.
News4 mins ago
Thatcher
Boris is now claiming that Thatcher gave the U/K an early start in Climate Change, by closing the coal mines down..... Absolute rubbish coming from Boris as usual....
.......Thatcher took the miners on because she Hated Scargill and the working class.
.......Thatcher took the miners on because she Hated Scargill and the working class.
Answers
Thatcher was a despotical tyrant who deliberately ruined the manufacturin
15:17 Fri 06th Aug 2021
Leon - // The greatest leader Britain has ever had. I would even go as far to say better than Churchill. I can't help feeling, if Baroness Thatcher was in charge of the war coalition, it would now be known as the 1939-1942 war with no Far East connection. She wouldn't have dillied and dallied like Sir Winston did at times. And we would have had 3 extra years of peace. Great lady. Truly missed. //
I fear your assessment is blurred through your tears of selective nostalgia.
Lady Thatcher did not exist as a lone arbiter of policy, she was head of a government, and that government governed, as all democratic governments do, by consensus, so this myth that she alone was responsible for all the wonderful things she did is simply that - a myth.
It should also be remembered that while Mrs Thatcher understood complete opposition to her ideas, she never grasped the notion of dissent, and discussion and compromise - she simply saw those as weakness, and variations of opposition, and she dealt with them as such.
That is why, when she had become completely unapproachable, and unmanageable as a leader, she was forced out of power by her own party.
She may have been 'great' in some areas, but let's maintain a sense of reality and proportion.
I fear your assessment is blurred through your tears of selective nostalgia.
Lady Thatcher did not exist as a lone arbiter of policy, she was head of a government, and that government governed, as all democratic governments do, by consensus, so this myth that she alone was responsible for all the wonderful things she did is simply that - a myth.
It should also be remembered that while Mrs Thatcher understood complete opposition to her ideas, she never grasped the notion of dissent, and discussion and compromise - she simply saw those as weakness, and variations of opposition, and she dealt with them as such.
That is why, when she had become completely unapproachable, and unmanageable as a leader, she was forced out of power by her own party.
She may have been 'great' in some areas, but let's maintain a sense of reality and proportion.
Mr. Hughes. Baroness Thatcher was always a divisive figure and we could argue her strategy until the cows come home. But could we agree that she was better for the country than Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock would have been.
This argument almost manifested itself in recent years with the Trump debate. Trump was not everybody's cup of tea, but surely better than Hilary!!!!!
This argument almost manifested itself in recent years with the Trump debate. Trump was not everybody's cup of tea, but surely better than Hilary!!!!!
Leon - // Mr. Hughes. Baroness Thatcher was always a divisive figure and we could argue her strategy until the cows come home. But could we agree that she was better for the country than Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock would have been. //
We could - but that has nothing to do with your post, since you didn't ask that, and therefore it is not pertinent in responding to my reply, since I was not offered a chance to comment on that scenario.
I think it's dodgy debating when someone offers something as better than the situation at the time, as though that somehow bolsters up the argument for the good of that situation.
'Yes, my dog savaged a child in the playground, but it could have been worse, it could have savaged six or seven children.'
That's true, but that doesn't detract from what actually happened p- the 'maybes and 'could-have-beens' are not actually evidence that what did happen was automatically a good thing simply because it wasn't one of those alternatives.
// This argument almost manifested itself in recent years with the Trump debate. Trump was not everybody's cup of tea, but surely better than Hilary!!!!! //
I think that's even shakier ground to be honest.
I believe that Mrs Clinton would have been a better President in almost every area that Mr Trump was, but that is conjecture, and really rather done to death.
Offering Mr Foot and Mr Kinnock as alternatives and then saying that Mrs Thatcher was a better alternative does not validate her approach to government - the guy who sweeps Downing Street would have been a better prospect than those two - again it's faulty debating, offering two no-hopers to prop up the argument that an incumbent must therefore be better.
Clearly she was - but that's not really saying much - is it.
We could - but that has nothing to do with your post, since you didn't ask that, and therefore it is not pertinent in responding to my reply, since I was not offered a chance to comment on that scenario.
I think it's dodgy debating when someone offers something as better than the situation at the time, as though that somehow bolsters up the argument for the good of that situation.
'Yes, my dog savaged a child in the playground, but it could have been worse, it could have savaged six or seven children.'
That's true, but that doesn't detract from what actually happened p- the 'maybes and 'could-have-beens' are not actually evidence that what did happen was automatically a good thing simply because it wasn't one of those alternatives.
// This argument almost manifested itself in recent years with the Trump debate. Trump was not everybody's cup of tea, but surely better than Hilary!!!!! //
I think that's even shakier ground to be honest.
I believe that Mrs Clinton would have been a better President in almost every area that Mr Trump was, but that is conjecture, and really rather done to death.
Offering Mr Foot and Mr Kinnock as alternatives and then saying that Mrs Thatcher was a better alternative does not validate her approach to government - the guy who sweeps Downing Street would have been a better prospect than those two - again it's faulty debating, offering two no-hopers to prop up the argument that an incumbent must therefore be better.
Clearly she was - but that's not really saying much - is it.
I disagree. Argument is the science of reason. I loved my first car - a Ford Escort. But hey, I would have taken a Ferrari. But still my Ford escort was better than a Fiesta and so on.
Thatcher was great in her own right. You argument about her not being on her own does not hold true. Anybody who has ever worked in either the private or public sector knows full well that a good leader is the one who makes the final decision. Democracy ultimately stops when the leader is voted in democratically.
Baroness Thatcher had a plan and stuck to her guns. She was brave, fearless and put the Great back in to Britain. I could say that is subjective, but would argue it is infact objective. Some of the previous posts have said if you think Britain is a third world country, go and visit a third world country. even some former Eastern Bloc ones will do!!! Try going on your miners strike in Belarus or former Yugoslavia.
But she had her faults. Personally, the whole Care in the Community was a bit of a balls up. And we are paying for that now. But, if it wasn't for her, we would be reading The Little Red Book in our primary schools now as opposed to be an open, free, tolerant and truly brilliant country!
Thatcher was great in her own right. You argument about her not being on her own does not hold true. Anybody who has ever worked in either the private or public sector knows full well that a good leader is the one who makes the final decision. Democracy ultimately stops when the leader is voted in democratically.
Baroness Thatcher had a plan and stuck to her guns. She was brave, fearless and put the Great back in to Britain. I could say that is subjective, but would argue it is infact objective. Some of the previous posts have said if you think Britain is a third world country, go and visit a third world country. even some former Eastern Bloc ones will do!!! Try going on your miners strike in Belarus or former Yugoslavia.
But she had her faults. Personally, the whole Care in the Community was a bit of a balls up. And we are paying for that now. But, if it wasn't for her, we would be reading The Little Red Book in our primary schools now as opposed to be an open, free, tolerant and truly brilliant country!
Leon - // Argument is the science of reason. I loved my first car - a Ford Escort. But hey, I would have taken a Ferrari. But still my Ford escort was better than a Fiesta and so on. //
Argument also requires that you make a point that is at least within shouting distance of the points to which you are referring - and this analogy fails utterly to do that.
Argument also requires that you make a point that is at least within shouting distance of the points to which you are referring - and this analogy fails utterly to do that.
Leon - // Thatcher was great in her own right. You argument about her not being on her own does not hold true. Anybody who has ever worked in either the private or public sector knows full well that a good leader is the one who makes the final decision. Democracy ultimately stops when the leader is voted in democratically. //
I have worked in both - and seen initially good leaders lose the plot and be deposed accordingly.
The leader may make the final decisions, but not every time - you would agree that no leader makes the final decision to oust themselves from power, Mrs Thatcher certainly did not - that's when the rest of the power structure comes into play.
Leaders have someone to lead - and the led will not always follow the leader.
I have worked in both - and seen initially good leaders lose the plot and be deposed accordingly.
The leader may make the final decisions, but not every time - you would agree that no leader makes the final decision to oust themselves from power, Mrs Thatcher certainly did not - that's when the rest of the power structure comes into play.
Leaders have someone to lead - and the led will not always follow the leader.
Mr. Hughes.
Also, for an argument to be successful (not won or lost, just successful) both the antagonist and protagonist needs to know what the opposition is going on about. I wholeheartedly have no idea what you are harping on about as I am doer, not a thinker.
Your intellect and philosophy eludes me.
But Baroness Thatcher was brilliant.
End of.
And if you think saying "end of" at the end of an argument is immature then you have a smelly poo poo bum.
Also, for an argument to be successful (not won or lost, just successful) both the antagonist and protagonist needs to know what the opposition is going on about. I wholeheartedly have no idea what you are harping on about as I am doer, not a thinker.
Your intellect and philosophy eludes me.
But Baroness Thatcher was brilliant.
End of.
And if you think saying "end of" at the end of an argument is immature then you have a smelly poo poo bum.
Leon - // But, if it wasn't for her, we would be reading The Little Red Book in our primary schools now as opposed to be an open, free, tolerant and truly brilliant country! //
Those tears of nostagia are clearly blinding you to simple reality - if we are not in China's thrall, it is not down to Margaret Thatcher!!!
Those tears of nostagia are clearly blinding you to simple reality - if we are not in China's thrall, it is not down to Margaret Thatcher!!!
Leon - // Also, for an argument to be successful (not won or lost, just successful) both the antagonist and protagonist needs to know what the opposition is going on about. I wholeheartedly have no idea what you are harping on about as I am doer, not a thinker. //
You have no need at all to point out that you are 'not a thinker' - your posts admirabley demonstrate that for you!
If you are not able to debate, and choose instead to foist your dubious opinions about the 'greatness' of a flawed politician, then maybe this is not the site for you.
You have no need at all to point out that you are 'not a thinker' - your posts admirabley demonstrate that for you!
If you are not able to debate, and choose instead to foist your dubious opinions about the 'greatness' of a flawed politician, then maybe this is not the site for you.
Who can actually argue that the poll tax was not the fairest way to do things ?
The mining industry was never cost effective and had to be closed at some point and so it has proved so she obviously saw the writing in the wall
No Labour leader would have had the gumption to do what she did in regards to the Falklands
This country benefited from her time in office but I cannot say the same of any other prime minister since
Can anyone ?
The mining industry was never cost effective and had to be closed at some point and so it has proved so she obviously saw the writing in the wall
No Labour leader would have had the gumption to do what she did in regards to the Falklands
This country benefited from her time in office but I cannot say the same of any other prime minister since
Can anyone ?
andy hughes
If you are not able to debate, and choose instead to foist your dubious opinions about the 'greatness' of a flawed politician, then maybe this is not the site for you.
Ha ha
So you are telling us that all other politicians are flawless ?
Funny how those who decry what she did can never provide examples of a premier who did far greater deeds for this country than her isn’t it ?
Or is it just that in all honesty regardless of how bad the Tory party are perceived they are still far better than having a Labour leader and that is why they have not been in power for decades
Even as bad as BoJo is perceived he is still deemed better than having a Corbyn or similar in power
If you are not able to debate, and choose instead to foist your dubious opinions about the 'greatness' of a flawed politician, then maybe this is not the site for you.
Ha ha
So you are telling us that all other politicians are flawless ?
Funny how those who decry what she did can never provide examples of a premier who did far greater deeds for this country than her isn’t it ?
Or is it just that in all honesty regardless of how bad the Tory party are perceived they are still far better than having a Labour leader and that is why they have not been in power for decades
Even as bad as BoJo is perceived he is still deemed better than having a Corbyn or similar in power
Latest Posts
Travel6 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
Older Voters Put Conservatives Way Ahead
News28 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles29 mins ago
